Manchester-3
"if T3 is going to be exclusively Ryanair, I see little need for it to be physically connected".
Tell me you are JOKING !
I'm unsure what proportion of MAN throughput RYR represents but disconnecting millions of passengers from your global connectivity seems to me to be a madness.
I'm stunned we need all these connections bringing together not decapitatation!
Tell me you are JOKING !
I'm unsure what proportion of MAN throughput RYR represents but disconnecting millions of passengers from your global connectivity seems to me to be a madness.
I'm stunned we need all these connections bringing together not decapitatation!
Yes, people do self connect and Ryanair passengers probably do too. However, that is still a comparatively small number. For 99% of passengers, having the Ryanair operation separate to the rest of the airport is not a problem as they are point to point passengers.
Would we be having this conversation if T3 was a BA mini hub? I would hazard a guess not.
In reality, having T3 separate is not a big issue and even less so as a one carrier non interlining carrier. Furthermore, T3 isn’t moving further from T2 either.
The situation is no different than LHR T5 and T4 that are a distance away from T2 & T3….. and BA still have split ops between T5 & T3.
MXP has two terminals much further away, one of which is a single carrier terminal. BCN’s two terminals are also miles away. By comparison, T2 & T3 at MAN are relatively close to each other.
Absolutely, there should be some type of landslide connection between the two terminals, whether that be a redeveloped skylink or a simple bus.
And yes, T1 should be demolished and repurposed/redeveloped so it’s doesn’t become an eyesore.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That was in the original plan I'm pretty sure. The problem is it's not always clear what has changed and what has not.
Has it actually been confirmed by MAN for example that T3's sole user will be ryanair?
I think I read that space has been allocated for a full domestic facility in T2 with airside transfers domestic to international and vice versa.
This was probably a comment on here, but I don't recall whether it was based on a statement from MAN.
Has it actually been confirmed by MAN for example that T3's sole user will be ryanair?
I think I read that space has been allocated for a full domestic facility in T2 with airside transfers domestic to international and vice versa.
This was probably a comment on here, but I don't recall whether it was based on a statement from MAN.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MANFOD
A domestic transfer facility would be welcomed although we still had FlyBe when plans were laid for the "Super terminal" back in 2012, certainly all the graphics showed T2 extending to T1 but with pier C removed so the implication was all one integrated terminal.
This of itself was all connected to Airport City when we were in bed with China. That seems to have developed into Warehouse City.
That is a part of the problem things can flex over time not least given the total disintegration of domestic feed and the US market re TCX, and the C word.
So where does MAN now sit 10 -15 years on ?
In the early naughties we had a strategic review, it would be good to evaluate where MAN now sees itself with the new CEO because as SKIP says over that time it has morphed more and more into a spoke rather than the vision which was a direct to direct hub.
Was it ever thus ?
Our based long haul carriers used to talk a good talk but always revert to expansion in their home bases of LHR and DUB. It was less than 12 months ago that an EI spokesman was absolutely gushing about the MAN base.... so gushing infact that in 2023 they have added massive capacity, frequency and new routes out of 'er Dublin !!!!
Likewise remember VIR who had big plans...... ?
Virgin Atlantic plots Manchester hub following Thomas Cook collapse | Travel Weekly
.....but who now also have amnesia and add frequency and new routes ex LHR everytime a new frame arrives.
So much for LA which WAS apparently carrying more pax from MAN 85% load than quote VIRs average load of 80%.
10 years back MAN saw itself as thee only show in town outside London trumpeting itself with the oft used byline .....
"18m people within 2 hours" you couldn't move as every PR spokesman for MAN trotted out the same line.
... but times have changed dramatically. Liverpool, Leeds, Birmingham have seen an explosion of lo cost pax in BHXs case long haul too.
Freight which was forecast to hit 240,000 was shifted to EMA. We just about have the 40,000 but not the 200k.
Our bullish main big hitters in terms of management moved to STN leaving us with a management team light years away from Gil Thompsons vision.
in the same way that CW has torn through and improved the customer service offering it would be nice to know where he now sees MAN now in terms of route structure ?
201 destinations is now down to circa 150.
If that 85% loading was true re LA why is nobody on the route ? The £/$ surely cannot have such a disproportionate effect that it has totally erased the whole market ?
Why can JetBlue not see opportunities eg BOS, you would think a narrow body to that market with their connectivity would be a nailed on winner.
India is now one of the largest economies in the world. According to earnest voices on LinkedIn Manchester has the largest investment outside London so why are the two not connected, its unfathomable ?
In some respects its as though airlines now have collective amnesia when it comes to MAN expansion.
Can they not get slots, is there no room, have charges been ramped up ?
Yes the MEBs are doing well but is this more to do with the airlines themselves and indeed capitalising on the abscence of PIA than initiatives from MAN themselves in terms of route development?
Don't get me wrong MAN does "OK" but is OK still good enough with pax figures rocketing at LHR, DUB and EDI ?
Even BHX is back to pre pandemic levels.
A domestic transfer facility would be welcomed although we still had FlyBe when plans were laid for the "Super terminal" back in 2012, certainly all the graphics showed T2 extending to T1 but with pier C removed so the implication was all one integrated terminal.
This of itself was all connected to Airport City when we were in bed with China. That seems to have developed into Warehouse City.
That is a part of the problem things can flex over time not least given the total disintegration of domestic feed and the US market re TCX, and the C word.
So where does MAN now sit 10 -15 years on ?
In the early naughties we had a strategic review, it would be good to evaluate where MAN now sees itself with the new CEO because as SKIP says over that time it has morphed more and more into a spoke rather than the vision which was a direct to direct hub.
Was it ever thus ?
Our based long haul carriers used to talk a good talk but always revert to expansion in their home bases of LHR and DUB. It was less than 12 months ago that an EI spokesman was absolutely gushing about the MAN base.... so gushing infact that in 2023 they have added massive capacity, frequency and new routes out of 'er Dublin !!!!
Likewise remember VIR who had big plans...... ?
Virgin Atlantic plots Manchester hub following Thomas Cook collapse | Travel Weekly
.....but who now also have amnesia and add frequency and new routes ex LHR everytime a new frame arrives.
So much for LA which WAS apparently carrying more pax from MAN 85% load than quote VIRs average load of 80%.
10 years back MAN saw itself as thee only show in town outside London trumpeting itself with the oft used byline .....
"18m people within 2 hours" you couldn't move as every PR spokesman for MAN trotted out the same line.
... but times have changed dramatically. Liverpool, Leeds, Birmingham have seen an explosion of lo cost pax in BHXs case long haul too.
Freight which was forecast to hit 240,000 was shifted to EMA. We just about have the 40,000 but not the 200k.
Our bullish main big hitters in terms of management moved to STN leaving us with a management team light years away from Gil Thompsons vision.
in the same way that CW has torn through and improved the customer service offering it would be nice to know where he now sees MAN now in terms of route structure ?
201 destinations is now down to circa 150.
If that 85% loading was true re LA why is nobody on the route ? The £/$ surely cannot have such a disproportionate effect that it has totally erased the whole market ?
Why can JetBlue not see opportunities eg BOS, you would think a narrow body to that market with their connectivity would be a nailed on winner.
India is now one of the largest economies in the world. According to earnest voices on LinkedIn Manchester has the largest investment outside London so why are the two not connected, its unfathomable ?
In some respects its as though airlines now have collective amnesia when it comes to MAN expansion.
Can they not get slots, is there no room, have charges been ramped up ?
Yes the MEBs are doing well but is this more to do with the airlines themselves and indeed capitalising on the abscence of PIA than initiatives from MAN themselves in terms of route development?
Don't get me wrong MAN does "OK" but is OK still good enough with pax figures rocketing at LHR, DUB and EDI ?
Even BHX is back to pre pandemic levels.
Last edited by Navpi; 2nd Jan 2024 at 08:21.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Manchester
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You keep saying this, but it's not true. The plan was always to close T1 once T2 was fully open. T2 was originally planned with 3 piers, but that's been reduced to 2 - but there is still the option to build a 3rd in the future.
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Manchester took itss eye off the ball. Rather than developing into a hub and getting an a anchor carrier like BA it was mire concerned about what Liverpool and Leeds-Bradford were doing. They then went to chase the lo-cost market to stymie growth at LPL & LBA rather than lay on its own strengths of becoming a long-haul hub for the North of England. Manchester were unable to juggle the different market sectors.
Manchester should have taken a leaf out of Munich's book by concentrating on legacy carriers , the large Inclusive Tour market, and then a smattering of lo-cost. Alas, it is too late. Manchester will have the throughput but not the status it needs to be a hub airport.
Manchester should have taken a leaf out of Munich's book by concentrating on legacy carriers , the large Inclusive Tour market, and then a smattering of lo-cost. Alas, it is too late. Manchester will have the throughput but not the status it needs to be a hub airport.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Manchester took itss eye off the ball. Rather than developing into a hub and getting an a anchor carrier like BA it was mire concerned about what Liverpool and Leeds-Bradford were doing. They then went to chase the lo-cost market to stymie growth at LPL & LBA rather than lay on its own strengths of becoming a long-haul hub for the North of England. Manchester were unable to juggle the different market sectors.
Manchester should have taken a leaf out of Munich's book by concentrating on legacy carriers , the large Inclusive Tour market, and then a smattering of lo-cost. Alas, it is too late. Manchester will have the throughput but not the status it needs to be a hub airport.
Manchester should have taken a leaf out of Munich's book by concentrating on legacy carriers , the large Inclusive Tour market, and then a smattering of lo-cost. Alas, it is too late. Manchester will have the throughput but not the status it needs to be a hub airport.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T2 would be demolished and comnected to an "improved" T3.
My assumption was an expanded T3 to fill in the gap ?
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...curity-9370929
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Manchester took itss eye off the ball. Rather than developing into a hub and getting an a anchor carrier like BA it was mire concerned about what Liverpool and Leeds-Bradford were doing. They then went to chase the lo-cost market to stymie growth at LPL & LBA rather than lay on its own strengths of becoming a long-haul hub for the North of England. Manchester were unable to juggle the different market sectors.
Manchester should have taken a leaf out of Munich's book by concentrating on legacy carriers , the large Inclusive Tour market, and then a smattering of lo-cost. Alas, it is too late. Manchester will have the throughput but not the status it needs to be a hub airport.
Manchester should have taken a leaf out of Munich's book by concentrating on legacy carriers , the large Inclusive Tour market, and then a smattering of lo-cost. Alas, it is too late. Manchester will have the throughput but not the status it needs to be a hub airport.
We had all the back slapping at the launch of T2 part 2 last year, re global connectivity when in truth are we not a glorified lo cost terminal with a "sprinkling" of long haul.
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it’s wrong to say Manchester is focussed on low cost and only has a ‘sprinkling of long haul’
We have nearly every major European legacy carrier:
Lufthansa
TAP
Swiss
Austrian
Brussels
KLM
Air France
Iberia
British Airways
Icelandair
Turkish
Aegean
Luxair
Aer Lingus
Finnair
In terms of long haul we have significant volumes from:
Emirates
Etihad
Aer Lingus
Air Canada
Air Transat
Virgin Atlantic
Birman
Cathay Pacific
Ethiopian
Gulf Air
Kuwait
Hainan
Qatar
Saudia
TUI
Singapore
Egyptair
Royal Jordanian
A not insignificant amount of passengers are connecting through MAN to/from short to long haul through alliance partners or other codeshare agreements, so whilst we don’t have a hub carrier we have significant presence from each of the alliances.
We have nearly every major European legacy carrier:
Lufthansa
TAP
Swiss
Austrian
Brussels
KLM
Air France
Iberia
British Airways
Icelandair
Turkish
Aegean
Luxair
Aer Lingus
Finnair
In terms of long haul we have significant volumes from:
Emirates
Etihad
Aer Lingus
Air Canada
Air Transat
Virgin Atlantic
Birman
Cathay Pacific
Ethiopian
Gulf Air
Kuwait
Hainan
Qatar
Saudia
TUI
Singapore
Egyptair
Royal Jordanian
A not insignificant amount of passengers are connecting through MAN to/from short to long haul through alliance partners or other codeshare agreements, so whilst we don’t have a hub carrier we have significant presence from each of the alliances.
Rather than developing into a hub and getting an a anchor carrier like BA
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oman
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Manchester took itss eye off the ball. Rather than developing into a hub and getting an a anchor carrier like BA it was mire concerned about what Liverpool and Leeds-Bradford were doing. They then went to chase the lo-cost market to stymie growth at LPL & LBA rather than lay on its own strengths of becoming a long-haul hub for the North of England. Manchester were unable to juggle the different market sectors.
Manchester should have taken a leaf out of Munich's book by concentrating on legacy carriers , the large Inclusive Tour market, and then a smattering of lo-cost. Alas, it is too late. Manchester will have the throughput but not the status it needs to be a hub airport.
Manchester should have taken a leaf out of Munich's book by concentrating on legacy carriers , the large Inclusive Tour market, and then a smattering of lo-cost. Alas, it is too late. Manchester will have the throughput but not the status it needs to be a hub airport.
I do not think this is correct. Once BA retreated from the provinces, there was nothing any airport could do to persuade them to return. MAN embraced low cost reasonably early, but maintained a healthy balance with legacy carriers. It was BHX, hanging on to the hope of a BA return and increased legacy flights which most suffered and is only now recovering from that strategy.
Today MAN probably has the best balance between the two sectors of any UK airport. They serve profitably many destinations which BA would never have served.
I really doubt that MAN ever tried to chase off competition at LPL or LBA. There was no need as these airports are not comparable in terms of size or catchment. The main issue is the lack of a UK airline which would consider a hub and spoke operation at MAN, or any other UK airport.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://ilovemanchester.com/time-out...isit-in-the-uk
......just not on a direct flight from the US on a US airline.
......just not on a direct flight from the US on a US airline.
And not on a direct flight from the US at all to Bristol, Hull, Newcastle, Belfast - all higher than Manchester's 10th place. Not sure of the revelance of this random domestic puff piece?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,257
Received 168 Likes
on
103 Posts
Napping / Mayfield
Well two things really.
Firstly if you are travelling on business to India you don’t ever change planes at an Indian airport if you can avoid it, hence those travelling there all use the ME3 to avoid that transfer and do the Dubai / Doha /AD two step. Done this so many times with many others, ok if you are just going to Mumbai or Delhi but going elsewhere use ME3. Also to be honest I would use ME3 over Virgin or any Indian carrier.
As for LA from the North of the UK I would suggest , but without evidence I admit, that there is a limited call for the route from the business community in the North, which leaves, tourism, which outbound will currently be limited due to the value of Stirling v Dollar, and inbound due to poor marketing of the area in the US.
I don’t see those routes having any growth potential until the Stirling v Dollar rate improves and as for the Indian route I would say it maybe able to support a x3 weekly service not daily though to Delhi / Mumbai but I am not sure.
Cheers
Mr Mac
Well two things really.
Firstly if you are travelling on business to India you don’t ever change planes at an Indian airport if you can avoid it, hence those travelling there all use the ME3 to avoid that transfer and do the Dubai / Doha /AD two step. Done this so many times with many others, ok if you are just going to Mumbai or Delhi but going elsewhere use ME3. Also to be honest I would use ME3 over Virgin or any Indian carrier.
As for LA from the North of the UK I would suggest , but without evidence I admit, that there is a limited call for the route from the business community in the North, which leaves, tourism, which outbound will currently be limited due to the value of Stirling v Dollar, and inbound due to poor marketing of the area in the US.
I don’t see those routes having any growth potential until the Stirling v Dollar rate improves and as for the Indian route I would say it maybe able to support a x3 weekly service not daily though to Delhi / Mumbai but I am not sure.
Cheers
Mr Mac
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 836
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Napping / Mayfield
Well two things really.
Firstly if you are travelling on business to India you don’t ever change planes at an Indian airport if you can avoid it, hence those travelling there all use the ME3 to avoid that transfer and do the Dubai / Doha /AD two step. Done this so many times with many others, ok if you are just going to Mumbai or Delhi but going elsewhere use ME3. Also to be honest I would use ME3 over Virgin or any Indian carrier.
As for LA from the North of the UK I would suggest , but without evidence I admit, that there is a limited call for the route from the business community in the North, which leaves, tourism, which outbound will currently be limited due to the value of Stirling v Dollar, and inbound due to poor marketing of the area in the US.
I don’t see those routes having any growth potential until the Stirling v Dollar rate improves and as for the Indian route I would say it maybe able to support a x3 weekly service not daily though to Delhi / Mumbai but I am not sure.
Cheers
Mr Mac
Well two things really.
Firstly if you are travelling on business to India you don’t ever change planes at an Indian airport if you can avoid it, hence those travelling there all use the ME3 to avoid that transfer and do the Dubai / Doha /AD two step. Done this so many times with many others, ok if you are just going to Mumbai or Delhi but going elsewhere use ME3. Also to be honest I would use ME3 over Virgin or any Indian carrier.
As for LA from the North of the UK I would suggest , but without evidence I admit, that there is a limited call for the route from the business community in the North, which leaves, tourism, which outbound will currently be limited due to the value of Stirling v Dollar, and inbound due to poor marketing of the area in the US.
I don’t see those routes having any growth potential until the Stirling v Dollar rate improves and as for the Indian route I would say it maybe able to support a x3 weekly service not daily though to Delhi / Mumbai but I am not sure.
Cheers
Mr Mac
As for India I here what you say , it’s certainly a difficult one the gauge effectively with potentially only Air India or Virgin realistically. The various second rate Indian carries are A hopeless and B consistently on the edge of collapse .
From a perspective of onward travel with reference to core VFR in the Punjabi, Kashmiri and Sikh communities Delhi gotta be a better option than Mumbai imho.