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

Southampton-2

Old 7th Dec 2018, 02:23
  #1101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Runway 02*:

TORA 1,893 (versus BOH 2,271)
TODA 1,831 (versus BOH 2,576) this doesn't change due to obstacles at runway end (train sheds, road, lighting, buildings)
ASDA 1,893 (versus BOH 2,271)
LDA 1,775 (versus BOH 1,838)

Runway 20*:

TORA 1,820 (versus BOH 2,026)
TODA 1,975 (versus BOH 2,086)
ASDA 1,820 (versus BOH 2,086)
LDA 1,605 (versus BOH 1,970)

*This is a personal estimate only and not yet published or confirmed. BOH comparisons for 02 use 08 and for 20 use 26.
TORA is defined as length of runway suitable for normal operations. It need not always equal to LDA (landing distance available). TORA doesn't include Stopway or Clearway. TODA (Take off Distance Available) TODA is the length of runway plus any clearway if available ASDA (Accelerate Stop Distance Available)​​​​​​

Last edited by shamrock7seal; 7th Dec 2018 at 05:30.
shamrock7seal is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 06:07
  #1102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: London
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Look at that landing field length on runway 20!!! It's like London City! Given landing on runway 20 is most common due to prevailing winds it hardly seems worth the bother to extend it.
Sharklet_321 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 06:33
  #1103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But the TODA from runway 20 at 1,975m sounds like it might be very good for a 737-800 (Ryanair? Jet2?)

Southends TODA is just 1,799 and both Ryanair (737-800) and easyJet (A320) operate from there all over the place.
Nakata77 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 08:09
  #1104 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 872
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RW20
What's the chance of this runway extension getting approval?
If so can anybody actually give the TODA for 20 and the 02 LODA,are these distances sufficient for 320 neo operation?
Personally don't think there will be any problems getting this passed, primarily because all works are confined to within existing airport boundary and no issues with ceo or neo operations!
stewyb is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 08:25
  #1105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,371
Received 56 Likes on 38 Posts
Originally Posted by stewyb
Personally don't think there will be any problems getting this passed, primarily because all works are confined to within existing airport boundary and no issues with ceo or neo operations!
So no objections from local residents expected?!
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 08:48
  #1106 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 872
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SWBKCB
So no objections from local residents expected?!
Yes but don't think this will have an overriding impact on approval being given, just that noise and environmental measures will need to be upheld and monitored stringently!
stewyb is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 09:02
  #1107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looking at the LDA at London city at 1319m declared and Southend 1609m declared,surely SOU figures estimated in these posts are far greater,and given that Planning permission is given,SOU future looks bright.
RW20 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 09:03
  #1108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,371
Received 56 Likes on 38 Posts
I admire your optimism - longer runways means more, bigger, noisier planes to the local residents.

What's the strength of local opposition - there are already quite stringent controls around opening hours (which will have an impact on any LCC base operation)
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 09:26
  #1109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: España
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Southampton's future is solely dependent on attracting airlines, the right routes, and providing them with incentives to operate from there. An extended runway does not guarantee that this will be the case.

The routes need to be ones that passengers want in sufficient number to make the operation economic, and the airport needs to both promote itself to the passengers and ensure that they have a great experience passing through the airport.

As has already been pointed out, LCC's will not base aircraft at an airport that restricts their ability to utilise each aircraft for three rotations each day. Southampton seems unlikely to get more than an away based aircraft operating on a W basis, unless the operational hours can be extended. Will the local residents accept this? Seems highly unlikely I suspect.
FFHKG is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 10:47
  #1110 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 872
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But surely operating hours are very similar to SEN?
stewyb is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 11:04
  #1111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the doghouse (usually)
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think SEN is open 24 hours, given there was lots of discussion around night bizjet movements on that thread over the summer.
The Nutts Mutts is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 11:08
  #1112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: España
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Google shows operating hours as 06.30 to 10.15. Previous discussion on this thread shows similar hours. Insufficient for a LLC based aircraft to able to get back in after third rotation without risk of diversion. Apparently, not unusual for late returns to divert to Bournemouth and coach back..... not something a LCC would want as they would need to relocate the aircraft back to SOU the following morning or coach the passenger to BOH for the first rotation.
FFHKG is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 11:13
  #1113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: 50+ north
Posts: 1,240
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by shamrock7seal
Runway 02*:

TORA 1,893 (versus BOH 2,271)
TODA 1,831 (versus BOH 2,576) this doesn't change due to obstacles at runway end (train sheds, road, lighting, buildings)
ASDA 1,893 (versus BOH 2,271)
LDA 1,775 (versus BOH 1,838)

Runway 20*:

TORA 1,820 (versus BOH 2,026)
TODA 1,975 (versus BOH 2,086)
ASDA 1,820 (versus BOH 2,086)
LDA 1,605 (versus BOH 1,970)
​​​​​​
It appears that one issue has been overlooked, namely the runway width. To attain a TORA/ASDA/TODA 1800M or more the runway width needs to be a minimum of 45 M. I suspect that the current 20 TODA is there due to grandfather rights, When the runway dimensions change it is probable that the 20 TODA will drop to 1799.

Even with the TORA/ASDA/TODA limited to 1799, the 02 LDA increased and the current 20 LDA, most of the distances are better than SEN.

While a 20 TORA/TODA will only increase to 1799 the obstacle environment (trees + hill) in the TOCS (take-off/climb surface) will be slightly improved due to the take-off being started further north than that currently available.
TCAS FAN is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 11:44
  #1114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: 50+ north
Posts: 1,240
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by stewyb
Personally don't think there will be any problems getting this passed, primarily because all works are confined to within existing airport boundary and no issues with ceo or neo operations!
May not be so straightforward. From memory there are provisions made in the airport's planning consent (possibly in the Section 106 Agreement) which requires (for noise abatement) that aircraft are not permitted to be closer to houses (I believe at least those in Southampton Road) than they would be on the current runway. This is one of the reasons why a parallel taxiway on the west side will never happen.
TCAS FAN is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 11:48
  #1115 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 872
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TCAS FAN
May not be so straightforward. From memory there are provisions made in the airport's planning consent (possibly in the Section 106 Agreement) which requires (for noise abatement) that aircraft are not permitted to be closer to houses (I believe at least those in Southampton Road) than they would be on the current runway. This is one of the reasons why a parallel taxiway on the west side will never happen.
the planes won’t be any closer to Soton rd from where they are now according to the plans!
stewyb is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 13:19
  #1116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 76
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SWBKCB:
What's the strength of local opposition
Apparently, following a public consultation, they are happy:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-46465109
KelvinD is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 13:37
  #1117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,371
Received 56 Likes on 38 Posts
Hundreds of people took part in a consultation with over 60% backing the proposals, the airport said.
Interesting - so potentially the other 30% could oppose. At least there is rent-a-quote spokesman from any organised opposition or residents groups threatening to campaign against
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 17:30
  #1118 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 75
Posts: 2,672
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TCAS FAN
It appears that one issue has been overlooked, namely the runway width. To attain a TORA/ASDA/TODA 1800M or more the runway width needs to be a minimum of 45 M. I suspect that the current 20 TODA is there due to grandfather rights, When the runway dimensions change it is probable that the 20 TODA will drop to 1799.
That would seem correct as SEN's paved runway is much longer than the 1,799m than it can declare for TORA, ASDA or TODA due to its runway width being similar to that at SOU. Talk of 1,975m at SOU would appear to be pie in the sky unfortunately.
Expressflight is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 17:58
  #1119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TCAS FAN
With what you have quoted on the possible TODA and LDA with the extension,are they sustainable distances for 320 neo etc,for med operations.
If they are then I see the opening hours to be the major obstacle for LLC operations.
RW20 is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2018, 20:19
  #1120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: U.K.
Posts: 1,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FFHKG
Google shows operating hours as 06.30 to 10.15. Previous discussion on this thread shows similar hours. Insufficient for a LLC based aircraft to able to get back in after third rotation without risk of diversion. Apparently, not unusual for late returns to divert to Bournemouth and coach back..... not something a LCC would want as they would need to relocate the aircraft back to SOU the following morning or coach the passenger to BOH for the first rotation.
Whilst what you say is true and whilst there are few (if any) examples in the U.K, many continental LCC bases are subject to curfews and restrictions. So it’s not that it is inherently prohibitive to the LCC model. The thing is, why SOU when many other U.K. airports offer greater flexibility?
easyflyer83 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.