Manchester-2
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No in depth analysis yet but December saw over 1.8m pax, up 1.5% on Dec 16.
Considering the loss of Monarch and some Ryanair reductions, I find it astounding MAN has managed to remain in growth figures, a big well done to all involved.
Jan may be down slightly. Granted it’s very anecdotal but I’ve passed through T3 twice this month already and even in ‘peak’ times it’s quieter than usual.
Considering the loss of Monarch and some Ryanair reductions, I find it astounding MAN has managed to remain in growth figures, a big well done to all involved.
Jan may be down slightly. Granted it’s very anecdotal but I’ve passed through T3 twice this month already and even in ‘peak’ times it’s quieter than usual.
http://mediacentre.magairports.com/mags-three-airports-serve-4-million-more-passengers-in-2017/
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know what (if any) plans exist to renovate the existing part of the terminal 2 building (including the remaining pier) as part of the Transformation Programme?
Cheers in advance.
Cheers in advance.
As mentioned previously, El Al will have to compete with a strong EZY product. People I have spoken to who remember (like me) the last time El Al flew into Manchester, are hoping the timings will be a lot better. No one wants a very early departure from Tel Aviv nor a late (after say 22:00) arrival back. They would be better to night stop in Manchester but that would be very unlikely.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are loads of images online showing what the whole redevelopment will look like once completed just do a search plus on YouTube but to answer your question yes there is as the whole of Terminal 2 will be totally transformed but an easy search online will show you CGI images plus videos.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers, had done so, and most (likely all) renders show the new extension, as opposed to the existing building. From what you can see in the latest fly through, the existing building remaining as it is now.
Of course, these don't necessarily represent an accurate view of the plans, hence throwing the question out to the floor!
Of course, these don't necessarily represent an accurate view of the plans, hence throwing the question out to the floor!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beware the uncontrolled out of date material in the public domain. There have been a number of significant design changes including different pier build sequences, car parks, and there will probably continue to be changes to interior fit out even during the build. The latest official MAG fly-through does show the inside of the refurbished existing T2 building (which retains its glass atrium). Once the extension opens in 2020 the old building starts internal reconfiguration to complement the new part, plus a start on Pier 3 which builds out from the front of the old building.
The extension was previously to be +140% of the existing footprint but has been scaled back to around +100%. It will still be a rather large terminal.
The extension was previously to be +140% of the existing footprint but has been scaled back to around +100%. It will still be a rather large terminal.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Leeds
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers Roverman, the bit that sticks in my mind as being the same as it is now is the check in area. I'd assume the teardrop style bag drop areas would be replicated (perhaps also the security area).
Sorry it has dropped to 100% expansion (is this the building footprint or floor space?). It feels like It would create relatively modest savings and perhaps mean the space becomes constrained in future years. Obviously MAG look at these things in detail so it's not intended to be a criticism.
Look forward to seeing the final outcome when it arrives.
Sorry it has dropped to 100% expansion (is this the building footprint or floor space?). It feels like It would create relatively modest savings and perhaps mean the space becomes constrained in future years. Obviously MAG look at these things in detail so it's not intended to be a criticism.
Look forward to seeing the final outcome when it arrives.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Sorry it has dropped to 100% expansion (is this the building footprint or floor space?)."
Good question Dobbo Dobbo.
roverman, are you able to say whether the reason for the reduced expansion area is to keep the project within the agreed budget, or have expected capacity requirements been revised such that they can efficiently be accommodated within a smaller area. And are there any implications regarding the number of contact and remote stands?
Thanks as always for your input.
Good question Dobbo Dobbo.
roverman, are you able to say whether the reason for the reduced expansion area is to keep the project within the agreed budget, or have expected capacity requirements been revised such that they can efficiently be accommodated within a smaller area. And are there any implications regarding the number of contact and remote stands?
Thanks as always for your input.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Stockport
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Roverman
I wondered if you could answer a query that has come to my notice looking at the fly-throughs.
some of the aircraft seem to have the arms attached to the right hand side of the aircraft, is this just artistic license, or is this the plan?
I wondered if you could answer a query that has come to my notice looking at the fly-throughs.
some of the aircraft seem to have the arms attached to the right hand side of the aircraft, is this just artistic license, or is this the plan?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Queries
Reduction in building footprint was a refining of the design to include the desired functions and capacity within a slightly smaller building. The building has some later vertical extensions which may a relocating of H&V plant.
Airbridges serving the right side of aircraft are not a feature. I think what appears to be this in the fly through is actually the 'spare' airbridge (when a stand block is in use for 2 x wide body rather than 3 x narrow body). One airbridge will be parked and retracted away from the aircraft in this mode. In the simulation it is shown close to the right side of one of the wide bodies, which is just an anomaly of the presentation.
Airbridges serving the right side of aircraft are not a feature. I think what appears to be this in the fly through is actually the 'spare' airbridge (when a stand block is in use for 2 x wide body rather than 3 x narrow body). One airbridge will be parked and retracted away from the aircraft in this mode. In the simulation it is shown close to the right side of one of the wide bodies, which is just an anomaly of the presentation.
