Southampton-2
Why get on some's case when they report important news on here? It's more relevant than pages of discussion about who "might" be coming next year or the year after.
Just because it's not good news doesn't mean to say it should be ignored.
Just because it's not good news doesn't mean to say it should be ignored.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Lower Upham
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time to refocus?
As I have mentioned several times on this forum, SOU is very different to most other regional airports - as I have previously expressed, it's more of a 'local London City', catering very well for those wishing to connect to the near continent and around the British Isles. Sure, there have been a few knocks to this traffic too recently, the demise of BMI Regional and the route to Munich, the closure of the Flybe/Connect service to Dusseldorf, and the withdrawal of KLM.
But the demand for these short hop regional connections has been positively reinforced by the recent significant increase in frequency of services to AMS, CDG, EDI and MAN, demonstrating just how popular these services continue to be.
I'm a firm supporter and user of SOU, and live only five miles from the airport in a rural area under one of the flightpaths. It is noticeable that my neighbours are very accepting of the turboprops and small regional jets, but always comment and object to the occasional visits of A320s and 737s, so even I have to concede that there is likely to be a good deal of resistance to the runway expansion plans.
Maybe we have reached the point where SOU needs to re-focus even more on very short-haul regional connectivity targeted very much at the business community and the well-healed city break market using small aircraft (like LCY) and leave the bucket and spade market to more suitable alternatives like BOH.
Very few other small regionals have such a dense and frequent domestic service as Southampton. I feel whatever happens, with such a thriving and vibrant business community in a very affluent area, one way or another SOU will continue to be successful at what it does best.
But the demand for these short hop regional connections has been positively reinforced by the recent significant increase in frequency of services to AMS, CDG, EDI and MAN, demonstrating just how popular these services continue to be.
I'm a firm supporter and user of SOU, and live only five miles from the airport in a rural area under one of the flightpaths. It is noticeable that my neighbours are very accepting of the turboprops and small regional jets, but always comment and object to the occasional visits of A320s and 737s, so even I have to concede that there is likely to be a good deal of resistance to the runway expansion plans.
Maybe we have reached the point where SOU needs to re-focus even more on very short-haul regional connectivity targeted very much at the business community and the well-healed city break market using small aircraft (like LCY) and leave the bucket and spade market to more suitable alternatives like BOH.
Very few other small regionals have such a dense and frequent domestic service as Southampton. I feel whatever happens, with such a thriving and vibrant business community in a very affluent area, one way or another SOU will continue to be successful at what it does best.
Closer to the present, how many remember the daily BUA BAC 1-11 from/to Glasgow, that was real noise!
Unless there is going to be some changes proposed to the current Section 106 Agreement, which I find extremely doubtful, ie either the airport trying to extend operations past 2300 or the LPAs trying to further restrict operations, just exactly what is the environmental impact going to be? If you are going to object then quantify it and provide evidence to show just exactly what, beyond the current situation, is going to further adversely impact the environment.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Daws Heath Essex
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is up to the airport owners/ operators to be prepared to fight on several fronts, some which will possibly include legal expenses. That will show how serious they are with their plans.
SAEN are still very active, especially as in the last few days Stobart have announced they expect SEN pax numbers to increase significantly with a throughput of 10m and plans to go to 20m in the medium term. That last figure is not remotely possible within the confines of the cap on ATMs and limitations on local infrastructure. But ten out of ten for ambition...and it helps to boost investors sentiment!!
Go for it SOU!
Last edited by Planespeaking; 20th Nov 2019 at 09:58.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its never going to go away, there will always be NIMBYs. When I was a lad 90% of the SOU noise complaints came from much less than 1% of the surrounding population. Something that we were never allowed to ask was "When did you buy your house? If it was after about 1911 there has always been an airport close by, so if you don't like aeroplanes, why buy a house near an airport?"
.
.
At SEN when the extension of the runway by 1000ft was approved an anti airport pressure group called SAEN (Stop Airport Expansion Now) forced two Judicial Reviews both of which found against them. They then sought a third only for the judge to throw out their application and to say they were wasting the court's time.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stewyb
Usuall reply with head in the sand. To get approval now is going to be extremely unlikely. SOU will have to accept that further decline in pax numbers will happen,as the limitation of its airside potential is underlined. Flybe dictate it's survival,but for how long?
Usuall reply with head in the sand. To get approval now is going to be extremely unlikely. SOU will have to accept that further decline in pax numbers will happen,as the limitation of its airside potential is underlined. Flybe dictate it's survival,but for how long?
[QUOTE=LTNman;10622722]That is a ridiculous statement as justification for an extended runway. Not everyone is an aircraft or airport fan so when people move house they will be aware of the airport and what flies in and out. They will also allow for some expansion but they would not have allowed for a runway extension so they have every right to complain.
Never posted this to justify an extended runway, just stating facts.
We are talking about less than 200 metres extension. What is going to be the result? It will not open the doors to wide bodied aircraft (runway too narrow) or 24 hour operations (due to the Section 106 Agreement). To use your own words we are talking about “some expansion”, the first runway development, apart from re-surfacing, for about 40 years.
Never posted this to justify an extended runway, just stating facts.
We are talking about less than 200 metres extension. What is going to be the result? It will not open the doors to wide bodied aircraft (runway too narrow) or 24 hour operations (due to the Section 106 Agreement). To use your own words we are talking about “some expansion”, the first runway development, apart from re-surfacing, for about 40 years.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=TCAS FAN;10622754]
Exactly. It does make me laugh when people from other threads come on here to belittle SOU. I’m sure said poster wouldn’t have the same point of view if it was a debate about expanding LTN.
The simple fact of the matter is people want and need to fly from SOU, unlike a lot of airports which people only use because they have no choice. The extinction lot simply want to ban all flying, despite the fact thousands of people will lose their jobs and civilisation will go backwards 100 odd years. If people like that and some of the posters on here had their way, we would all still be living in caves and rubing sticks together. Constructive debate is always welcome, but not irrational negativity.
So news flash, SOU is going to get its runway extension. Just as SEN did, which by the way is open at night, so SOU with its restricted hours will have an easier time of it. The runway will eliminate thousands of unnecessary car journeys every year, and create hundreds of new jobs. It’s win win, and SOU just needs to jump through all the planning hoops which they are clearly doing.
N.B just another reminder to all posters to ignore the troll on here. Like all trolls, he survives off bites. Don’t rise to it.
That is a ridiculous statement as justification for an extended runway. Not everyone is an aircraft or airport fan so when people move house they will be aware of the airport and what flies in and out. They will also allow for some expansion but they would not have allowed for a runway extension so they have every right to complain.
Never posted this to justify an extended runway, just stating facts.
We are talking about less than 200 metres extension. What is going to be the result? It will not open the doors to wide bodied aircraft (runway too narrow) or 24 hour operations (due to the Section 106 Agreement). To use your own words we are talking about “some expansion”, the first runway development, apart from re-surfacing, for about 40 years.
Never posted this to justify an extended runway, just stating facts.
We are talking about less than 200 metres extension. What is going to be the result? It will not open the doors to wide bodied aircraft (runway too narrow) or 24 hour operations (due to the Section 106 Agreement). To use your own words we are talking about “some expansion”, the first runway development, apart from re-surfacing, for about 40 years.
The simple fact of the matter is people want and need to fly from SOU, unlike a lot of airports which people only use because they have no choice. The extinction lot simply want to ban all flying, despite the fact thousands of people will lose their jobs and civilisation will go backwards 100 odd years. If people like that and some of the posters on here had their way, we would all still be living in caves and rubing sticks together. Constructive debate is always welcome, but not irrational negativity.
So news flash, SOU is going to get its runway extension. Just as SEN did, which by the way is open at night, so SOU with its restricted hours will have an easier time of it. The runway will eliminate thousands of unnecessary car journeys every year, and create hundreds of new jobs. It’s win win, and SOU just needs to jump through all the planning hoops which they are clearly doing.
N.B just another reminder to all posters to ignore the troll on here. Like all trolls, he survives off bites. Don’t rise to it.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Rivet Joint;10622850]
i am not belittling SOU. I am just saying residents have a right to object and to be heard. As a point of interest I oppose any expansion of Luton Airport. The difference between LTN and SOU is that Luton Council has its fingers in the till at LTN so ignores residents.
Anyway back to a news report. I have to say I find councillors concerns in Southampton refreshing as it is an example of democracy working. It it is allowed they will have reviewed the pros and the cons. https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/180...ort-expansion/
i am not belittling SOU. I am just saying residents have a right to object and to be heard. As a point of interest I oppose any expansion of Luton Airport. The difference between LTN and SOU is that Luton Council has its fingers in the till at LTN so ignores residents.
Anyway back to a news report. I have to say I find councillors concerns in Southampton refreshing as it is an example of democracy working. It it is allowed they will have reviewed the pros and the cons. https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/180...ort-expansion/
Last edited by LTNman; 21st Nov 2019 at 05:03.
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why can't you lot just get along? Seriously you should all be embarrassed and ashamed of yourselves. Do you actually know what your petty quarrels look like to visitors of this thread? It's childish, grow up.
Surely it's in everyone's interest that BOTH airports prosper rather than listen to supposedly grown men/women argue the toss about who's airport is more shiny. Get a grip.
Surely it's in everyone's interest that BOTH airports prosper rather than listen to supposedly grown men/women argue the toss about who's airport is more shiny. Get a grip.
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SOU is not the only regional airport facing strong opposiiton to its expansion plans.
BRS wants to further expand its infrastructure and have its current 10 mppa cap lifted to 12 mppa. As with its last major expansion application (which was approved in 2011) there is a well-orchestrated campaign that objects to that airport growing further. In fact, the current planning application was lodged with the local council (North Somerset unitary authority) a year ago next month and a determination date is still to be set. It won't be until next year now.
LBA wants to build a new terminal and opposition to that is strong too.
If regional airports around the country are prevented from expanding we as a nation will have to look to see how our economy and way of life can be moulded to accept that situation. It would contrast sharply with the likes of China that plans to build over 200 new airports in the next 15 years and India with 100 new ones planned in an even shorter timescale.
BRS wants to further expand its infrastructure and have its current 10 mppa cap lifted to 12 mppa. As with its last major expansion application (which was approved in 2011) there is a well-orchestrated campaign that objects to that airport growing further. In fact, the current planning application was lodged with the local council (North Somerset unitary authority) a year ago next month and a determination date is still to be set. It won't be until next year now.
LBA wants to build a new terminal and opposition to that is strong too.
If regional airports around the country are prevented from expanding we as a nation will have to look to see how our economy and way of life can be moulded to accept that situation. It would contrast sharply with the likes of China that plans to build over 200 new airports in the next 15 years and India with 100 new ones planned in an even shorter timescale.
A large portion of the Application relates to additional car parking, involving removal of the large mounds located west of the road leading to the long term car park. Hopefully someone has carried out some investigative work on them - they are not mounds of earth!
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what could be the problem with them?
Also in the plans the approach lighting,and I guess that it's a crossbar and Centreline lights have to be removed,will this effect the minimal for the cat I ILS approach in bad weather.
In order to retain the current RVR minima the current elevated lighting will have to be inset into the new paved surface of the starter strip.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this is so is this not very unusual and potentially prognostic?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I notice on the plans that the extended car park is ‘subject to demand’ so maybe that suggests they won’t be carrying out works straight away?
Not unusual if you have a displaced threshold, as is the case with RWY 20. Just up the road at Farnborough their RWY 24 has three or four inset crossbars due to a very large threshold displacement.