Manchester-3

[SCFC1EP]

Etihad have five Doncaster flights scheduled in January (4th, 5th, 11th, 18th and 25th), all scheduled to arrive at 2325

Plenty of time for Manchester Airport to have had the logistics in place to handle these flights but no lets turn away one of our main airlines, to a non- MAG group airport

Not that the airport is busy in Jan late at night, OK parking spots may be a little tight with most aircraft lightly to be grounded but surely they can keep 2 or 3 empty stands clear around cargo

[chaps1954]

Its the handling agents that are not interested as the airport owns none of the equipement

[ManchesterUK]

Hello there, does anyone know the name of the company which is currently scrapping the Thomas Cook A330s at Manchester Airport?

Many thanks and wishing everyone a loverly Christmas.

[gonetech]

AJW Group purchased the aircraft for teardown. I think Chevron are involved in the actual teardown work though.

[ManchesterUK]

Thanks Gonetech.

[UnderASouthernSky]

Can't help feeling that these "why is my local airport not getting these cargo flights?" frustrations are sometimes based more upon spotters missing out on registrations rather than genuinely being upset about "lost revenue", "poor PR" or the perceived "impact" on the surrounding region's industry.

[easyflyer83]

Agreed. Always said the same.

[Navpi]

Sorry but I really do have to respond to this "spotter jibe".

This isnt a forum for playground observations.

I have an active interest in Manchester Airport, and indeed politics and its wider impact on the economy , particularly the one covering the North of England. I also run a business based in Cheshire, it's 25 minutes door to door from the warehouse complex at Manchester Airport but when I examine goods in our warehouse they haven't arrived via Manchester they have airways billl's from the forwarder marked East Midlands and London Stansted. Hence my interest.

Having had 3 or so years of the Northern Powerhouse we are currently in quote "levelling up mode" , ho, ho ,ho, we will see whether that bares fruit or is an empty vessel......yet again.

Some actual spades in the ground rather than review after review would be good. I digress.

If we assume there will indeed be Government investment in infrastructure projects across Northern England the vast majority of that would surely be aimed at an area which encompasses the 22m population who reside within 2 hours of Manchester Airport. It is /was the natural long haul and European gateway for manufacturing, distribution , tourism etc. It is at the epicentre of Northern England surrounded by Liverpool, Leeds/Bradford and Sheffield, 3 of the largest cities outside London notwithstanding Manchester/Salford, if there is to be a reset of the UK economy Manchester Airport is absolutely vital in that jigsaw, and that includes the movement of "just in time" parts and materials. Manchester Airport underpins that critical mass in terms of delivery.

Before Covid Manchester had upwards of 600 movements per day with 000s of tonnes of freight carried underbelly, multiple services around the world provided the direct import/export access that companies in the North required. As passengers have evaporated so have the routes and services, direct flights and vital connectivity have disappeared.

30m passengers were in effect providing a vital indirect bonus in terms of masses of cargo capacity carried below deck. Manufacturing, Aerospace, Pharmaceuticals, Textiles still want those goods but with no services how are they sourced ?

The Strait Times is the equivalent of the FT for Singapore, last week with the imposition of restrictions at the Channel Tunnel the Communications Manager at Luthansa was quoted as saying they would maintain cargo flights to Heathrow, Manchester and indeed Edinburgh using 777Fs if need be.

Lets consider Manchester within that equation. It was in my view a given that Lufthansa management had a "perception" that Manchester was the "big airport" for the North, the one with the manpower, capacity, logistics and capability to handle pure frieght on perhaps a daily basis. Sadly I cannot speak German but I suspect there would be hearty laughter if one was to suggest Doncaster was more capable than Manchester and yet 2 days later that is exactly what happened.

Let's be clear Manchester is a major operation for Lufthansa, Manchester has the largest customer base outside London and one of the largest in Europe, is it inconceivable that they would not alight on Manchester as the first port of enquiry for direct cargo flights ?

Maybe they were offered EMA as a standard alternative and refused, maybe the cargo manager at Doncaster monitoring the fact that Etihad and Qatar had also shifted to Doncaster saw an opportunity and picked up the phone.

Whichever way you look at this it is to say the least baffling that three of Manchester's largest customers did not choose what to many outside the perimeter looking on , would be the Norths natural gateway, an airport where you "already" have a sizeable daily operation ?

At the end of 2019 Manchester was full, I understand why at that time MAG were being prudent in sending enquiries to EMA. But we are in a different world, it could be years before 30m is seen again but as the economy picks up, there may well be a necessity for direct airport to airport pure cargo flights and simply diverting those enquiries to EMA is clearly not working.

We don't know if Etihad, Qatar and Lufthansa initially considered Manchester flights, nor do we know if there was an attempt to switch sell to EMA. It might be presumptuous nay pompus to suggest Manchester was even in there thoughts, this is all open to conjecture, but the fact these flights now operate from Doncaster offering up the possibility they didn't even consider Manchester as the first "go to" option is perhaps even more damming is it not ?

Instead they chose another airport outside the group and on that basis the business philosophy is a spectacular fail.
Who within the board is looking at this failure, because a failure it most definitely is.

I cannot believe that those airlines who we count as amongst MANs best , most active , and most loyal customers didn't consider MAN as the 1st choice, its simply not plausible. What did they do stick a pin on a map and say "hey we have multiple service into Manchester, it's our largest base after Heathrow , one of our busiest in Europe but I know, we will go to Doncaster instead ?

It beggars belief.
​
I suspect MAG would say well none of this matters there is no money in cargo, I would disagree. Many passenger airlines have switched mindset in this crisis to pure cargo operation , even though they are not cargo airlines as such.
AA and Korean have even taken out seats to increase cargo uplift. TUI are currently running freight flights between Detroit and Germany. Airlines, the freight forwarders Warehousing and presumably some airports all make good revenue but apparently when it comes to Manchester there is no money in it ? I do wonder if like parking aircraft they base figures on 2019 prices whilst everyone else is charging eye watering premiums and to coin a phrase making a fast buck.

I do wonder if enquiries to Manchester are met with a flat refusal rather than a "ok, let's examine how much can we charge", "how can we make money like everyone else".

Manchester's first obligation is to its shareholders but surely there is also an holistic approach to the wider economy ?

Over the years I have seen numerous lobbying by the airport to MPs and via the press where MAG management have demonstrated how vital the airport is to the lifeblood of the North of England. It's not a two way stretch, you cannot indicate one day how critical you are to the UK economy and whilst at the sametime decapitate a major aspect of the service you provide by either artificially diverting revenue opportunities and employment to another airport in the East Midlands, or in the case of Doncaster failing to compete at all.

We expect competition from Heathrow, but Doncaster ?

Come on Manchester, you are better than this.

[AndrewH52]

Whilst I wouldn’t necessarily disagree with some of the things you say Navpi, you’re argument has at least two flaws in it. Firstly, 600 movements a day maybe, but only a couple of dozen of those will carry underbelly freight. The vast majority of movements are by EZY, RYR, Jet2 and Tui - not a kg of freight between them.

Secondly, you seem to be under the misapprehension that J-I-T freight is flown on a regular basis. It’s not. It only gets flown when something goes wrong with road / rail / sea connections.

Most contributors on this forum would probably want to focus on MAN getting its bread and butter passenger offer right first. And besides, given how much you complain about Heathrow sucking the long haul life blood out of the regions, it’s a bit hypocritical to complain Manchester isn’t doing the same with freight?

[Sioltach Dubh Glas]

I'm fully supportive of the main thrust of the argument put forward by Navpi in claiming that the management at MAG needs to start to think about the business being lost to Doncaster as a competitor in the freight world. Yes frightening may not be as profitable as passengers (self loading freight) but it is all part of the overall airline business.

It has been said by another poster that the airport is not responsible for the provision of handing equipment and that this is down to the airline's appointed handling agents. Should the airport not be looking at the contracts for the facilities that these agents are offering and ensure that they provide the correct equipment for the modern day freighters? Could the agents not decide to pool equipment in order to minimise costs - I accept that these loaders do not come cheaply.

I appreciate that there are those who post on here and believe that their word or way of thinking is "the true light" however there are others who, reading their posts also seem to have done a lot of research into the subject being discussed - no matter what that subject might be - and who are able to articulate their posts in such a way as to make for worthy reading. Please let the discussion continue as I'm sure that none of those posts are by " spotters" eager to see a Lufthansa freighter in the ground but rather by members, who are true supporters of the airport itself, and who hate to see the opportunity of business being lost to another airport.

Manchester is the UK's largest airport outside of the London area and serves as the northwest's gateway to the world not just for passengers but also, with the right effort, for freight.

[chaps1954]

Who are you expecting to operate all these cargo flights, cargo has been good over the summer only because of medical supplies as most of the other cargo is in decline except express
parcels, The MAG group has all the parcel operators i:e Fed Ex , UPS,and DHL which are way out of the league for Manchester parking and also night operations, ad hoc flights don`t make a lot on money
and quite aften tie up a parking stand for 24hrs plus and can cost the handlers a lot of money for staff and equipement, plus they have a high chance that the times will vary and tie a stand up for many hours.

[SWBKCB]

Lufthansa: why the focus on freight only a/c, plenty of capacity in the belly of LH's regular flights. Have LH 777F's turned up at anywhere other than DSA - how many flights? Also, nobody's mentioned yet that Doncaster has been feeding fresh produce into the supermarkets supply chains for many years, so they are an obvious choice.

The Northern Powerhouse stuff is just - well. Is DSA not in the north, does EMA not serve the north or does some mythical line say it's not 'north' enough? This point of view looks very odd from any other northern point than Manchester (and you wonder why other cities are suspicious of Manchester dominance of the NP).

The situation is that Manchester's regular widebody freight business dropped to such an extent that it no longer become viable - stands weren't available and the equipment/staffing resource just wasn't justified, especially when there are other airports in the group who were capable of picking up any passing trade. That's clearly group policy, and any critics on the perftrmance of individual teams needs to put up or shut up.

Is there a long term shift in the business reducing pax numbers and increasing the number of widebocy pure freighters? How much money are you prepared to spend on it? If MAN isn't going to be stand constrained for pax business and there is a long term, regular demand for widebody pure freighters, maybe the policy will change and the money will be spent. But otherwise they are better off spending the money on the terminals than chasing the odd, irregular charter.

[Mr A Tis]

The Lufthansa B777 into Doncaster was a one off with fresh foods, due to the channel ports fiasco.
Iceland, Tesco & Lidl have huge regional distribution centres in........... Doncaster !
I guess that is where the food was wanted.

[OzzyOzBorn]

The situation is that Manchester's regular widebody freight business dropped to such an extent that it no longer become viable

We're back to the 'chicken and egg' debate here. If you discourage and turn certain types of business away you can quickly reach the point where you can justify offloading support for that business because it has dropped in importance at the site! When you've turned the business away, you don't need to employ the staff who would have serviced that business under different circumstances. It is very easy to justify such cutbacks to observers who are unaware of the backstory. Of course, I note that your postings often reflect the views of one closely aligned with the specific interests of EMA in particular, so your defence of a status quo which sees MAN's inherent cargo business redirected there is understandable.

critics on the perftrmance of individual teams needs to put up or shut up.

My criticism of MAG has been quite measured. I have praised many areas of the business which have done an outstanding job under difficult circumstances. Sadly, cargo and the agency responsible for hangar lettings have performed poorly, and I see no harm in highlighting that. What is the point of praising a department which has delivered really well if they're then to observe you saying exactly the same of troubled sections which have clearly failed to meet the standards which a successful business should expect?

How much money are you prepared to spend on it?

Well, at an airport on the scale of MAN, I'd be prepared to spend enough to bring in two Hi-Lo's and ensure that sufficient staff are trained to operate them (delegating this to a third party handling agent if preferred). Given that MAN has a large cargo village on site already, costs need only be incurred at the margins. The fixed infrastructure is there. The competence has been there in the past. It's not like starting from scratch.

This discussion reminds me of uncomfortable parallels with a situation which occurred at MAN many years ago. A certain well known 'favourite airline' was minded to focus its prestige long-haul services at LHR. But they didn't want long-haul competitors to thrive at MAN in their absence. So they'd spread the word that long-haul would never be viable at MAN. And when an airline did appear on a route such as HKG, they would suddenly appear on the route as well - with timings very similar to the competing airline. But, in this case, that tactic didn't put off the competitor, so they switched their flights to different days of operation at very short notice. Passengers booked from MAN on the original days of operation were switched to a domestic connecting flight. Requests to change to the new MAN day of operation were refused with inflexible fare rules cited at booked passengers (yes, I recall this from sour first-hand experience). Of course, passenger loads on the new MAN days of operation were lamentable with negligible advance bookings in play. And so the service was withdrawn, because there obviously "wasn't demand for the route", right? Other long-haul routes were intentionally undermined to prove a point too. Well, Manchester Airport management were pretty unimpressed by some of the business practices they were subjected to back then.

Fast-forward to today. And - on cargo, at least - MAG themselves now seemingly operate in this way. Discourage the incumbent business. Switch sell leads away. Deflect enquiries. Say no. Then argue that MAN can't justify supporting that business any more because demand just ain't there in economic volumes. Oh, the irony. What would Sir Gil have said?

Can't help feeling that these "why is my local airport not getting these cargo flights?" frustrations are sometimes based more upon spotters missing out on registrations

Busted! Yes, we've no interest in preserving employment, supporting the region's economy, or optimising the business. We just want more reggies to jot down in our little notebooks. [SIGH ...].

[SWBKCB]

We're back to the 'chicken and egg' debate here. If you discourage and turn certain types of business away you can quickly reach the point where you can justify offloading support for that business because it has dropped in importance at the site!

spannerstcx post #199 gives much of the background as I understand it. Much of the previous MAN freight disappeared into the belly of pax a/c. The only flights that I can think of that might fall into your category are (ironically) the former LH flights. Can't remember why but seem to remember that availability of stands was mentioned as an issue.

Of course, I note that your postings often reflect the views of one closely aligned with the specific interests of EMA in particular, so your defence of a status quo which sees MAN's inherent cargo business redirected there is understandable.

Nope - no connection, born in Broadheath, worked at MAN briefly, had family working at MAN until recently for Caledonian, Thomas Cook, Easyjet that I can remember. No EMA connections! My dislike of the sort of comments below are immaterial of location - any evidence that the teams referred to are doing anything other than group policy?

Cargo is a very conspicuous exception - perhaps because it appears to be [mis]managed from a remote location within the group.

But it is surely time for 'special measures' for the embarrassingly inept cargo division

troubled sections which have clearly failed to meet the standards which a successful business should expect?

And now back to chickens and eggs.

Well, at an airport on the scale of MAN, I'd be prepared to spend enough to bring in two Hi-Lo's and ensure that sufficient staff are trained to operate them (delegating this to a third party handling agent if preferred). Given that MAN has a large cargo village on site already, costs need only be incurred at the margins. The fixed infrastructure is there. The competence has been there in the past. It's not like starting from scratch.

And where would you get the business from - wools post #189 lists those airports with the kit - I'd add in EDI for the UPS 767's. So outside MAG and LHR there are the EDI parcel flights, Air France and Cargolux at PIK (?), 1-3 fresh produce flights a week at DSA and what else - any ad hoc work that's floating around? Where's the business case for the money over and above other priorities, or is it all about prestige?

[seahawks]

It’s all about one poster with an agenda and several on-line identities who insists upon repeating the same arguments repeatedly. I used to work with Ozzy/Shed on the 4th floor of a certain airport building and always respected their aviation knowledge. Time to move on imho.

[southside bobby]

MAG is not just about Manchester Airport which many have never come to terms with...

MAG consists of STN/EMA AND MAN.

[southside bobby]

Post #201...

Quote..."In truth the £260M for MAG will cover the gap in local authority finances caused by non-payment of dividends for the next couple of years"...

Would anyone care to explain !?

The local authorities themselves put the money in to shore up MAG due to the pandemic & Government failure to develop an Airport/Aviation strategy so is it suggested that the local authorities put the money in then immediately look to take it back then out in the form of dividend?...Cos that ain`t gonna happen... BTW it was made clear at the time of the inward investment that it was for the 3 airports including STN/EMA & not just Manchester Airport.

[MANFOD]

After the cheap jibes about 'spotters', we've had some sensible comments but I do commend the well articulated arguments by navpi, ozzi and Sioltach even if you don't agree with them.

Andrew H52 makes a valid point on the very high proportion of non-freight carrying flights but I would suggest that in a normal summer his 12 flights, mainly long haul carrying cargo in the belly hold, is on the low side even just for inbounds. Then there are the outbound loads.

I can actually understand MAG's policy in normal circumstances of concentrating freight at EMA or STN given MAN's constraints on slots and stands at busy times. However, I do think there should be flexibility to adapt that policy in the sort of situation that has prevailed for the last 9 months when I suspect J-I-T will have applied at times. I don't pretend to know the finances of acquiring or renting the necessary equipment for the airport or handling agent, or moving equipment from another airport, but with the number of passenger flights being relatively low, including those long haul flights that would normally carry cargo below, one would have thought there would be some money to be made from handling pure freight flights.

[Ex Cargo Clown]

There isn't really a huge amount of money to be made from freight other than specialist stuff. Plus it's very difficult finding a profitable PtP route and you need a handling agent willing to take the contract on.. It's not as simple as just sticking a 74F in and offloading it. Don't think AHK was particularly profitable for all concerned, you end up in a situation where as a GHA you are only getting handling fees which aren't much now considering most freight agents use ERTS.