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

Carlisle-2

Old 2nd Dec 2017, 16:59
  #121 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: on the border line
Posts: 76
Waste of money,time and government funds!
highwideandugly is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2017, 19:35
  #122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: STANSTED & MANCHESTER
Posts: 1,728
Wasn’t the same said about SEN
daz211 is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2017, 09:20
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 645
The difference I see between Carlisle and Southend is that Southend Airport has a railway link to a major city, whereas Carlisle Airport doesn't but Carlisle itself does.

I wish them luck, but I feel that if this could work places like Swansea, Tees-side, Plymouth , Liverpool & Humberside would have more domestic services than they do.
01475 is offline  
Old 4th Dec 2017, 15:08
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: STANSTED & MANCHESTER
Posts: 1,728
Some nice pics on the Carlisle Airport Facebook page of the runway upgrade which is now underway.
daz211 is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 09:47
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: SW Scotland
Age: 36
Posts: 259
I don't think many people live in downtown Carlisle. The airport's catchment will be the whole of northern Cumbria and parts of Scotland and Northumberland so the difference in trannsport to the station or airport is probably limited, provided you travel by your own car.
Exactly, there's no advantage between airport and train station, so why wouldn't you just take the train if going to London? For most parts of Annan and Northumberland, they are on the rail line to Carlisle too - so connecting onto a london train becomes easier than going to the airport.

However, there seems to be a lot of focus in here about the Southend flights. Don't forget there is Dublin & Belfast too. I read one of the early planning permission applications, which included a study on feasibility of the Southend and Dublin routes.

It suggested that Southend would never be viable, and would always need subsidies to operate, while Dublin was expected to prove profitable after 3 years.

Heathrow 3rd runway has been approved, and as part of the approval there is a requirement to launch a certain number of new domestic destinations. FlyBE have released a proposed route map of what they'd like to consider as part of their support for the runway - Carlisle was amongst the proposed routes.

A route to Heathrow with onward connections would certainly be viable.

Building a terminal at Carlisle also opens up other possibilities. What about flights to the Isle of Man on a small 10 seater aircraft? perhaps even scenic tours of the Lakes & Hadrians wall. Occasional passenger charter flights to elsewhere in the UK, again on 10 seaters. A lot of Northern football teams tend to use charters when playing teams in the deep south - could Carlisle make use of the airport when playing Plymouth, Exeter or elsewhere?

We have the airport there, and if passenger facilities can be offered at little to no cost, then we may as well do so. It wouldnt take a great deal of flights to cover the costs of them.

Pax flights without a subsidy would bankrupt the airport, like it did to Blackpool. Low cost airlines would pay no landing or navigation charges, and would want paying for each passenger that got off at Carlisle.

Larger aircraft would require extra fire, security cover etc, that means greater costs for the airport operator. Freight would be the only real option.
As others have stated, aircraft size is limited to ATR42 size, so not a great issue. Cargo flights also require fire coverage, so thats a mute point. Security cover will be minimal, immigration will be provided by staff from other airports on an ad-hoc bases when needed, and any other jobs can be covered by Stobart Rail staff if needed.

The terminal is being built and operated as cheaply as possible, which will allow them to see just how much demand there is with minimal risk. It can always be expanded if the demand is there, or maintained at little to no cost if the demand is limited.

But at least there will be a facility there if someone wants to use it.
nighthawk117 is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 10:30
  #126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 581
15. Passenger and/or cargo fixed wing aircraft movements shall be limited to the
following types of aircraft: Jetstream 41; DHC-8Q400; ATR 42; ATR 72; and
RJ146 (or aircraft of equivalent characteristics in terms of size, weight, carrying
capacity, noise, and other polluting emissions).


Perhaps the embraer 195 will be permitted to land here within the definition of the above planning permissions.




fjencl is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 10:52
  #127 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 931
A route to Heathrow with onward connections would certainly be viable.
Euroair, probably other(s) also, operated a LHR route in the good old days and failed, it needs to be operated by an operator with interline connections whereas, in one booking, they can book CAX/DXB or wherever and not pat thru the nose for a CAX/LHR and with no guarantee of making their onward connection that they may have paid again thru the nose for.

But then Stobart Air don't wish for a LHR service ... They seem to only recognise one LON airport!
Harry Wayfarers is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 11:00
  #128 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Behind a desk, dreaming of the sky
Posts: 509
Considering their main operations are at SEN, it would make sense to operate to that 1 LON airport. LHR/LGW would be too expensive for the limited pax numbers they'd put through

Though i agree, small pax flights to other big hubs (DUB/AMS/CDG/FRA) might be a worthwhile venture to improve the utilisation of the airport. If they were more serious about that, they'd make a bigger terminal
Plane.Silly is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 11:49
  #129 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 645
Until major London airports have sufficient capacity for it to be worthwhile letting in small planes it's logical for London to be served via a smaller airport with less capacity issues, and for the hub connection to be where all the other small UK regional airports avail themselves of the current alternative to Heathrow's 3rd runway; Schipol.

Of course all this means that both services are made less viable, and that border staff get involved; a perfect example of the harm being caused by political dithering :-(
01475 is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 12:23
  #130 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: East London
Age: 37
Posts: 979
Originally Posted by Plane.Silly View Post
Though i agree, small pax flights to other big hubs (DUB/AMS/CDG/FRA) might be a worthwhile venture to improve the utilisation of the airport. If they were more serious about that, they'd make a bigger terminal
I'd suggest that in the event KLM was secured the proposed terminal would be adequate for their needs, you're going to see 70 or 80 seaters as they do in Norwich, Humberside etc rather than 737s or Airbuses.
AirportPlanner1 is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 12:48
  #131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Behind a desk, dreaming of the sky
Posts: 509
Reading the current planning permission that aircraft up to ATR-72/ RJ146 /-8 is the limit the runway can handle.
Wuld KLM (cityhopper) E175's fit into this category?
Or would we go down the messy route of adding BE ops?
Plane.Silly is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 12:56
  #132 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 863
Before going down this road look at the plans for the terminal. This is small scale with capital SS's.
DC3 Dave is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 13:35
  #133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: He was here a moment ago
Posts: 267
I'm immediately thinking of LH... Eurowings has had a modest but sustainable seasonal route into NQY. German tourists love the English countryside and national parks, so Carlisle could could be a winner for weekly inbound tourism to the Lake District.
ara01jbb is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2017, 20:04
  #134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 931
I think you'll find that Cornwall features in a very popular German TV series ... Perhaps a little alike 'Doc Martin', and that is the reason that Cornwall and NQY are so popular with the Germans
Harry Wayfarers is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2017, 06:28
  #135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Behind a desk, dreaming of the sky
Posts: 509
Reading the current planning permission that aircraft up to ATR-72/ RJ146 /-8 is the limit the runway can handle.
Wuld KLM (cityhopper) E175's fit into this category?
Or would we go down the messy route of adding BE ops?
Without making myself sound stupid, i just remembered Stobart air operates ATR's & operate to DUB. Surely that's the Hub connection sorted? Then others can add on others as/when needed
Plane.Silly is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2017, 07:38
  #136 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 931
You mean that Stobart wouldn't object if another operator tried to start a LHR service in direct competition with their SEN service?
Harry Wayfarers is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2017, 07:41
  #137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Behind a desk, dreaming of the sky
Posts: 509
Probably not another LON, i meant to refer to other hubs and/or other smaller airports
Plane.Silly is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2017, 07:52
  #138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 931
Well if it's a non UK hub, as is DUB, then the likes of SPL & CDG, to name but two, would be direct competition to Stobart's DUB route and, to a degree, their SEN route.

This is a problem with the airport and airline operator both being the same, in the old days I worked for Brymon Airways who operated both PLH & NQY airports, the airports were to never to develop to their full potential because they were a closed shop.

Similarly Lands End and Skybus, I understand the helicopter operation wanted to relocate to LEQ but Skybus told them to Foxtrot Oscar, and just how many turboprop operators is SEN attracting when they have Stobart Air in-house who can operate there cheaper than any competition?
Harry Wayfarers is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2017, 08:56
  #139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: East London
Age: 37
Posts: 979
In fairness to Stobart there are hardly any turboprop operators....at least not any that would need/want to go to SEN or CAX.
AirportPlanner1 is offline  
Old 6th Dec 2017, 10:06
  #140 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 863
I would imagine Stobart have many contacts amongst Cumbria's business community. And prominent use of the Stobart brand may play well with many in that area. That, together with their experience in running a not insignificant regional airline may prove key factors.

Others have mentioned taxpayers money. But why criticise Stobart if they take advantage of what's on offer?
DC3 Dave is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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