Southampton-2
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MARKEYD
Lolo flights are always going to be at best a whimsical idea,the truth is the destinations mentioned would wholely suit Bournemouth rather then Southampton,and indeed would be tried at Bounemouth if they had the pax base for such destinations.
As mentioned by many on this blog,unless Southampton management step up a few gears ( and on recent times this looks very unlikely) the airport will continue much as it is,that is gain a few airlines the lose them,add a odd destination,invest in retail side,but little else investment airside.Southampton will plod on,but not at the pace it could and should be at.
Lolo flights are always going to be at best a whimsical idea,the truth is the destinations mentioned would wholely suit Bournemouth rather then Southampton,and indeed would be tried at Bounemouth if they had the pax base for such destinations.
As mentioned by many on this blog,unless Southampton management step up a few gears ( and on recent times this looks very unlikely) the airport will continue much as it is,that is gain a few airlines the lose them,add a odd destination,invest in retail side,but little else investment airside.Southampton will plod on,but not at the pace it could and should be at.
Last edited by RW20; 7th Jan 2018 at 18:11.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brighton uk
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with everything you have just said
The routes mentioned are far more suited for BOH and some are being trialled this summer with Super break holidays
As said before , Southampton does very well on scheduled flights and will continue to do so Bournemouth the holiday charters
The routes mentioned are far more suited for BOH and some are being trialled this summer with Super break holidays
As said before , Southampton does very well on scheduled flights and will continue to do so Bournemouth the holiday charters
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the doghouse (usually)
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems like a very specific destination list considering it's a puff piece article in a local rag. I'd have expected a generic statement along the lines of "we're hoping to expand our offering to more destinations in the future." A list of destinations such as they mentioned in that article would normally come at the official announcement of the new routes.
So I guess they're either getting way ahead of themselves and blurting out daydream thoughts to the press, or there's maybe something in the pipeline.
So I guess they're either getting way ahead of themselves and blurting out daydream thoughts to the press, or there's maybe something in the pipeline.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So an Aer Lingus Regional service operated by Stobart Air, which would compete with the Flybe SOU-DUB service, an airline which also has a franchise agreement with.....oh - Stobart Air? I'd never say never, but that would make for some very interesting dynamics between the two airlines. I'd be offering long odds on that happening if I was Ladbrokes!
Southampton has often suffered from being over reliant on 1 airline, be it Air UK, BA Express or currently Flybe. It also needs to have a taxiway that removes the backtracking involved when using Rwy 20.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But it would make things a lot more easier for operations at SOU if we did have that taxi way especially during busy periods and to be honest it should have been part of the original redevelopment plan back in 1991.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I can't argue with your sentiment that it would make it easier, but then there's easier and there's necessary and right now it's not really necessary, I've operated from SOU airport off and on for 11 years and I've never once had an issue with the backtracking.
Think I am right in saying that a taxiway to the 20 threshold would need to be on the eastern side of the runway (ie, via a crossing point at the existing mid-runway taxiway/holding point), as there isn't space to fit one in the other side?
Looking at it in Google Earth, a car park and the 20 ILS glidesplope aerials are in the area where a taxiway would need to go, as far as I can see.
Looking at it in Google Earth, a car park and the 20 ILS glidesplope aerials are in the area where a taxiway would need to go, as far as I can see.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only way possible for a additional taxiway would be eastern side,involving crossing the runway,not ideal,but possible.However as stated before there is no immediate need for this,and of course this involves investment ,sadly it's not going to happen.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I can't argue with your sentiment that it would make it easier, but then there's easier and there's necessary and right now it's not really necessary, I've operated from SOU airport off and on for 11 years and I've never once had an issue with the backtracking.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 886
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't wait for capacity to be reached, act now and develop an infrastructure fit for future growth. I would imagine a northern taxiway will be put in place at the time of a runway resurface and will probably entail a bit of tarmac from stand 14 out to the runway, more than sufficient to alleviate certain delays and will not cost huge amounts of money if done at the same time. That's my guess anyway!
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Daws Heath Essex
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry but you are not talking sense. You only have to look at the discrepancies between the arrivals and departure boards on any given day to see that the majority of arrivals (even the ones that arrive early) are departing late. Of course this could be down to a number of reasons but SOU prides itself on its car to plane time duration, and from personal experience I could not find fault with that. It stands to reason that the lack of any real taxiways is a huge handicap with planes effectively having to sit on stands whilst the runway becomes free. If it was not an important cog in an efficient airport why do all airports have them? Apart from LCY, which other airport in the whole of the UK have backtracking of the runway? Even if this point could be argued, your point is flawed in that a well run business plans for the future, it does not wait until it is crippled before putting its hand in its pocket. The low cost operators would be turned off long before that.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 886
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even SEN have just spent several millions on completely upgrading it's three taxiways in addition to a resurfaced and extended apron area. The three taxiways have greatly reduced the need for runway backtracking, presumably Stobart consider this investment to be future proofing the airport.
Well I can't argue with your sentiment that it would make it easier, but then there's easier and there's necessary and right now it's not really necessary, I've operated from SOU airport off and on for 11 years and I've never once had an issue with the backtracking.
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: GI
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who flies into Southampton multiple times a week, I can't say I have ever been delayed due to having to backtrack. I have had plenty of short delays while waiting for push and start due to other aircraft either taxiing or pushing, but a full length taxiway would not do anything to solve this.