Manchester-3
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Teesside, UK
Age: 33
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 63
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The additional pier wipes out even more stands.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 63
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a fair question Navpi. I tried to raise the issue earlier of when the TP is hopefully complete whether we will have more stands and the potential for growth within the airfield boundaries. Is the situation really worse now than pre-pandemic when TCX, MON, and flybe had based aircraft, even allowing for some additions from easyjet and Jet2? As I recall, 2 or 3 years ago, MAN couldn't accommodate proposed expansion by Ryanair on the grounds of terminal capacity as much as parking stands in the morning peak. I suspect the number of based a/c then was nearer 100 than 80 but maybe someone could confirm.
The other 80 were made up of the usual suspects
JET2, RYR, EZY , TUI, etc.
We cannot move beyond the current airfield footprint , so what now ?
Not sure we can rely on multiple W sectors from other bases or larger aircraft ?
Much as i like the piers have we compromised ramp space in order to provide gold standard facilities for what is predominantly the bucket and spade brigade?
Last edited by Navpi; 9th Jan 2022 at 14:10.
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: SYD
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eventually, maybe. However, plans to backfill Thomas Cook capacity principally involved adding more based aircraft for S2020, but a certain Covid-19 put paid to that. Meanwhile, FlyBe's demise came right at the start of C-19 ... I don't think that any new based aircraft have come to MAN on the back of that. We'll see what happens in Summer 2022, if we can finally shake free from covid theatre.
I seem to recall that the MAN-based Thomas Cook fleet was in the mid-twenties at the end, but could be mistaken on that.
I seem to recall that the MAN-based Thomas Cook fleet was in the mid-twenties at the end, but could be mistaken on that.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unless it changes, this coming summer only has MCO (12 x weekly?); JFK daily, and at present ISB at 4 x weekly. By my reckoning, that will require no more than 4 based a/c as Virgin consider it more important for fleet utilisation to preserve their slots at LHR. Incidentally, BGI is showing 5 x weekly but the flights, perhaps surprisingly, are with transfers at LHR using BA for the domestic leg.
I don't believe the TCX based fleet ever reached mid-twenties, probably high teens, but I could be wrong. And of course their long haul flights (7 based a/c, was it?) included some arrivals back at MAN after 09.00 when there might not have been the same pressure on capable stands.
One rumour a while ago about possible new parking stands was somewhere in the vicinity of the viewing park but others may know if that was correct and if so whether it's still an option.
much as i like the piers have we compromised ramp space in order to provide gold standard facilities for what is predominantly the bucket and spade brigade
Given one B777F/B747F stand can hold 2 x B737/A320 what's your preference? Send cargo to another MAG airport or tell a based carrier to drop two based units?
Last edited by Skipness One Foxtrot; 9th Jan 2022 at 22:29.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: U.K.
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And let’s not fool ourselves into thinking MAN TP is gold standard. MAN was never going to get a glass palace and MAN TP isn’t. It’s practical, modern and pretty pleasant but it’s nothing particularly luxurious or grand.
Leisure travel is indeed a huge part of MAN and it always will be. You misjudge the bucket & spade brigade who, in reality at MAN (and most other northern airports) spend their money and no doubt fund those “gold standard” facilities. Not withstanding that, as we all know, MAN serves many non leisure routes and carriers.
I’m still not convinced that this isn’t about spotters wanting more variety.
Leisure travel is indeed a huge part of MAN and it always will be. You misjudge the bucket & spade brigade who, in reality at MAN (and most other northern airports) spend their money and no doubt fund those “gold standard” facilities. Not withstanding that, as we all know, MAN serves many non leisure routes and carriers.
I’m still not convinced that this isn’t about spotters wanting more variety.
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: SYD
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given one B777F/B747F stand can hold 2 x B737/A320 what's your preference? Send cargo to another MAG airport or tell a based carrier to drop two based units?
Note that previous instances which saw proposed additional based Ryanair units turned away related specifically to T3 access; nothing to do with space on the West Apron which would be the logical choice for servicing cargo flights.
I’m still not convinced that this isn’t about spotters wanting more variety.
Whilst those November numbers represent a recovery from the March 2021 covid nadir of 2,844,918 and 39,710 Tonnes, it is clear that there is still a huge chasm separating today's throughput from the 2019 highs. So maybe you should consider that this is about interested parties wanting to see MAG putting some energy into attracting back much-needed business, rather than leaving the routes team on furlough for far too long, issuing consecutive no-div notams week after week, and rejecting freighter requests seemingly by default. If anyone is arguing that MAN can't cope with 20% of previous passenger throughput and less than half of recent cargo numbers, then they need to be asking serious questions of senior management. I'll take extra business for MAN whether it be "more variety" or extra Jet2's and Ryanair's. MAN needs everything it can get! The airport is enduring the biggest slump since WW2.
By the way, a word to the wise on the 'spotters' jibe. My years as a spotter from the age of ten led to a rewarding career in the industry which I always wanted to work in. I know that to be true of many other PP users also - including Skipness, I suggest. It is probably unwise to be haughtily dismissive of the avgeek massive on here!
If anyone is arguing that MAN can't cope with 20% of previous passenger throughput and less than half of recent cargo numbers, then they need to be asking serious questions of senior management.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: U.K.
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the way, a word to the wise on the 'spotters' jibe. My years as a spotter from the age of ten led to a rewarding career in the industry which I always wanted to work in. I know that to be true of many other PP users also - including Skipness, I suggest. It is probably unwise to be haughtily dismissive of the avgeek massive on here!
Not withstanding that, I stand by my comment that for many, this argument will be about getting more variety and reg’s in their note books and some more exotic birds that might divert in.
There’s nothing wrong with that, it was nice to see a Air Tahiti in MAN last week, for example, rather than just getting to see one in LAX.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 63
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reference to "gold standard" was of course relative as a few snipers are I'm sure aware. The point remains there has been a tsunami of posters claiming limited facilities, no stands, no ramp space et al.
I am merely suggesting that a new pier which constrains space even more might be not be a priority at the moment given those constraints.
And yes as for the "spotting jibe", leave it out.
I am merely suggesting that a new pier which constrains space even more might be not be a priority at the moment given those constraints.
And yes as for the "spotting jibe", leave it out.
