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

Southampton-2

Old 13th Aug 2020, 14:26
  #2421 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 40
Posts: 539
Weather

Isnít the weather lovely at the moment? You would have to be a truly sad individual to feel the need to post negative rubbish right now. Itís not like SOU has all three of the countryís regional airlines climbing over each other to open routes and KLM are back with a bigger plane, all whilst the aviation industry is seriously suffering at the moment I might add. Meanwhile at BOH, itís being used as an aircraft graveyard which I guess is quite fitting (N.B this is not intended to open the tiresome debate on SOU v BOH so donít even go there). My comment is merely intended to highlight that when you look at the facts, there is clearly a lot of value placed on SOU by the aviation industry, and that more will be forthcoming when its operational abilities are improved.
Rivet Joint is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 15:28
  #2422 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 343
Your Usual over optimistic view,and unacceptable remarks aimed at the contributors who have different ,but valid and equally important view as you.
​​​​​​Clearly you need to open your eyes to the fact that the airport cannot be sustainable on its existing and proposed near future routes.
Its tough times for the airport,with an uncertain future.
RW20 is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 15:31
  #2423 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London UK
Posts: 54
Originally Posted by Wycombe View Post
...The extension will enable existing operators to operate in a more commercially beneficial way and will enable operators of larger types (which can use the airport today but in a quite restricted way) more flexibility (ie, to fly further with greater loads)....
Do the larger types include A321s?
richardwpprn is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 16:10
  #2424 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: 50+ north
Posts: 855
Originally Posted by richardwpprn View Post
Do the larger types include A321s?
A 321 can operate off the current runway, as I believe it already has. As highlighted by other posts its mainly a question of the Max take-off weight can be accomodated ie combination of PAX, their bags, fuel and therein range that the aircraft can operate to. If the airline can make money from what's available, it they'll consider it.

Operation of the 321 with the combination of the current RWY 20 TORA 1650M and obstacles in the take-off climb area (Marhill Copse trees, now hopefully removed) there isn't a lot going for the 321, or should I say "the 321 isn't going far"?.

Given the improved TORA 1799M with the northern extension and the south end trees removed it opens up a lot more possibilities, especially for the Neo Please don't ask me exactly what as I don't have current performance charts. Look at what EZY have acheived with similar TORA at SEN.
TCAS FAN is online now  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 17:03
  #2425 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Waters edge
Posts: 365
Looking Ahead

On July 30th 2020, SOU airport owners (Ferrovial) - which own AGS (Aberdeen Glasgow and Southampton Airports), issued their First Half results for 2020: https://static.ferrovial.com/wp-cont...entation-1.pdf

AGS is on page 11. You can see what they say about money. Assuming planning approval for the SOU runway extension is granted - it should be - that does not mean that the airport owners (who also own a large share of Heathrow - pages 9&10), will be willing to pay for it.

On the basis of current indications, it is not unlikely that all AGS airports could be sold to raise cash needed by Ferrovial elsewhere - (eg. LHR).

In the meantime, SOU will do just fine backfilling the Flybe routes, but in common with other airports in Europe, recovery to even 2019 levels will take years, extension or not.

https://www.iata.org/en/iata-reposit...ravel-outlook/

FF

Flitefone is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 17:36
  #2426 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Valencia
Posts: 220
Interesting to see that London City, a commercially viable airport has put the brakes on all further planned development; the same can be said about airports in the Manchester Airport group. I cannot realistically see Southampton's owners being willing to commit to any capital expenditure until the future aviation picture becomes much clearer - they will want to see a clear pathway to get a return on their investment which is not possible in the current climate. I think it's time for some on this thread to face the facts and take a "reality check".
FFHKG is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 17:57
  #2427 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the doghouse (usually)
Posts: 234
AGS have publicly stated their intention to continue with the runway extension project, indeed they're running a very active PR campaign to gain support for the extension. Pretty much all the AGS backroom staff at SOU were made redundant (right up to the MD)... apart from those working on the runway extension. They're the only ones who survived the cull and remain there today.
The Nutts Mutts is online now  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 18:13
  #2428 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,500
Is that staffing working on getting the extension built or getting through the planning process? Clearly land with permission for development is more valuable than land without.

If AGS are that committed to getting the extension built, surely they must be confident they can attract new business that will can make the investment pay, otherwise the business case just doesn't stack up.
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 18:47
  #2429 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 40
Posts: 539
Originally Posted by SWBKCB View Post
Is that staffing working on getting the extension built or getting through the planning process? Clearly land with permission for development is more valuable than land without.

If AGS are that committed to getting the extension built, surely they must be confident they can attract new business that will can make the investment pay, otherwise the business case just doesn't stack up.
Exactly, but you canít speak sense on this thread because it has been infiltrated by a resident troll which a number of BOH posters not surprisingly encourage. What is more disappointing though is the so called balanced SOU posters being complicit by not standing up to it. Shame on all of you, you know who you are.

Obtaining planning permission for a project like this costs hundreds of thousands of pounds just in surveys, plans etc, let alone the salaries for the whole team that SOU hired to manage the project. If they had no intention to implement the extension immediately they would put the whole process on hold straight away. LCY is not a comparison to SOU, nor is LHR. Those airports were expanding to facilitate expected growth. As Logan confirmed, even the regional planes that currently fly from SOU can not operate properly, so the extension is needed to support existing operations, and also the move to larger planes that aviation is on a whole moving towards. We are not going to see a manufacturer invest in any new planes below the 80 seat market again. I am not sure why there is such a stigma attached to larger jets anyway, as this will result in less aircraft taking off and landing, and therefore less frequent noise disturbance.
Rivet Joint is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 19:28
  #2430 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 620
The infrastructure changes, of which I am personally confident shall be approved, will be constructed for the long term future of the airport and not by people with short term visions and suggesting now is not the time to invest. Aviation and travel will at some point return to those levels seen prior to Covid and SOU needs to be in a position to capitalise. The entire project is costing circa £15m and is for a minimal length of extra tarmac and several hundred additional car parking spaces. Quite frankly this costing pales in to insignificance versus airport projects elsewhere and what's more AGS have categorically stated on several occasions that the money is there to be spent. Bored of hearing arguments why the airport will or will not survive and hope for the regions sake that in 12 months time things will be changing for the better!
stewyb is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 19:41
  #2431 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,500
AGS have categorically stated on several occasions that the money is there to be spent.
Were these statements pre or post-COVID?

Most of the money invollved in getting the planning permission will already have been spent - clearly it makes sense to have a final push to get it over the line and have it in your back pocket. What would be interesting to know is whether this is what the people referred to are are doing or whether they are pushing on to the next stage and are plannning to be pouring concrete.
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 13th Aug 2020, 23:28
  #2432 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 104
Originally Posted by SWBKCB View Post
Were these statements pre or post-COVID?

Most of the money invollved in getting the planning permission will already have been spent - clearly it makes sense to have a final push to get it over the line and have it in your back pocket. What would be interesting to know is whether this is what the people referred to are are doing or whether they are pushing on to the next stage and are plannning to be pouring concrete.
Within the last two weeks by airport bosses
SKOJB is online now  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 03:54
  #2433 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 321
Originally Posted by Rivet Joint View Post
Meanwhile at BOH, it’s being used as an aircraft graveyard which I guess is quite fitting

Originally Posted by Rivet Joint View Post
(N.B this is not intended to open the tiresome debate on SOU v BOH so don’t even go there)
​​
Can you see the irony & double standards in your post here Rivet? You can't have it both ways, so which is it?
Reversethrustset is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 07:59
  #2434 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,166
Reversethrustset - was going to make a similar comment.
adfly is online now  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 08:54
  #2435 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brighton uk
Posts: 902
Couldnít agree more !!
There are only two people on this forum , one who continually complains and the other who continually
ď feeds ď the troll while telling everyone else in a patronising manner not to

Everyone else just carry on as normal with your postings !!
MARKEYD is online now  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 08:56
  #2436 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Waters edge
Posts: 365
This is what boss of AGS said publicly post Covid

From the AOA Summer magazine, see page 24:

https://www.aoa.org.uk/wp-content/up...ummer-2020.pdf

FF
Flitefone is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 10:23
  #2437 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 63
Posts: 185
Originally Posted by richardwpprn View Post
Do the larger types include A321s?
No, is the blunt answer.
The SOU MD and his colleagues said quite at length to empathise it (the runway extension and changing the obstacle clearances) was to enable current types (A319 and the better performing A320Ceo and A320Neo) to take off with a more economical payload and also to be able to fly to further afield destinations.

The A321 (even the Neo) would not be able to operate without taking large penalties, it would be a restricted airport for crewing this type due to the risk of tail strikes.
Besides a 220-235 seater is not in any way viable or on the horizon for SOU.

Likewise and we have had the come up time & time before about the Boeing 737-800NG - Again this type is not suitable for SOU's runway in its current or the planned form, even the SFP a/c.

You may have seen the odd visit of an A321 and the 737NG but these were one off's.

The only Boeings that can perform with ease out of SOU are the 737-300 and 400 and the 757-200. (both almost historic now)
The MD-95/Boeing 717 of Volotea seems to be OK but I would imagine when it has a full load and bags for Palma, and a very hot day the flight planning is interesting.
rog747 is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 11:18
  #2438 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southampton
Posts: 124
Originally Posted by MARKEYD View Post
Everyone else just carry on as normal with your postings !!
Seconded well said, I always thought forums were a place to air different views on the same subjects!!!
Dropoffcharge is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 12:09
  #2439 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London UK
Posts: 54
Originally Posted by rog747 View Post
...The SOU MD and his colleagues said quite at length to empathise it (the runway extension and changing the obstacle clearances) was to enable current types (A319 and the better performing A320Ceo and A320Neo) to take off with a more economical payload and also to be able to fly to further afield destinations....
So A320 service to TFS is whatís envisaged?
richardwpprn is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2020, 12:26
  #2440 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: 50+ north
Posts: 855
Originally Posted by richardwpprn View Post
So A320 service to TFS is whatís envisaged?
Can SEN do it with a similar TORA? I believe that the answer is "yes". Look at the opportunities available with a capability to operate a 3.5 - 4.0 hour sector length.

As for TFS, its already been done off the current runway and its trees off the south end, by TUI's (nee Thompson) B752s.
TCAS FAN is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.