Manchester-3

[southside bobby]

MAN slot constrained?...How so with 2 R/W`s...

STN is/was slot constrained but seem to have no problem handing many wide body freighters that MAN appear to anguish about here.

[MANFOD]

Well, two comments on that. Firstly, I did say at busy times. Secondly, slots can be constrained by terminal or stand capacity, not just runway slots. Terminal capacity is not applicable to freighters but apron and stand occupation for longer durations can be, particularly with the TP work going on.

But as I mentioned, perhaps flexibility during the covid crisis might have been an option but the airport presumably assessed financially it wasn't worth it. It's sad in my opinion for the reasons given by others, but it doesn't look as if a change of policy is likely.

[OzzyOzBorn]

OK. I note the frustration from some that the cargo debate has resurfaced again. I did think that a natural hiatus had been reached, and was prepared to leave it there. But new points have been raised by others and so I address them. However, I am puzzled by any suggestion that this debate is one person using multiple identities. That simply isn't so. I actually do know who several of the participants in the discussion are and I'm not aware of any of those posting here under multiple ID's. As for myself, I've made around 170 PPRuNe posts in just over three years all under a single pseudonym. Not overly prolific. There is no agenda to deceive with assorted aliases, so any assumption to the contrary is mistaken. No other names in use by me.

seahawks. I don't recognise you by username. But what I'm about to tell you may surprise - and not in any good way. The poster who did raise the cargo issue with such passion back in April (PPE flights) was indeed a name familiar to fourth floor alumni. That username has abruptly disappeared, but for the worst of reasons. We refer to a good friend taken far before his proper time. Maybe you joined us at the socially-distanced kerbside guard of honour lining his road as the funeral cortege drove by back in July. Funeral itself was family only, in accordance with covid restrictions. Otherwise there would have been hundreds there. I'm sure you will now recognise the person of whom we speak, but if not you can PM me. Either way, he and I agreed on many airport matters and disagreed on afew - but always remained best of friends throughout. And I would remind others here that it is an admirable quality to be able to debate earnestly with mutually respected friends and colleagues without falling out with them over differing opinions. In real life, I never came across anyone who had a bad word for our late colleague. He wanted Manchester Airport to be the best that it could be and I'm totally onboard with him on that.

Am I the person you had in mind when you spoke of "posting with an agenda"? If so, you are quite right. My agenda is the pursuit of positive outcomes for the region generally and Greater Manchester in particular. I want to see a thriving airport supporting thousands of skilled jobs, an upgraded and reinvigorated NW rail network, an expanded Metrolink and seamless coordinated bus and coach network with fully-integrated ticketing. I want to see investment in education and upskilling across the region. I want to see a technology and media sector thriving in the region. World class sports, venues, facilities. I make no apology for urging all those with a role in delivering these things to strive for the best outcomes they can achieve. Positive progress is a good thing. Manchester Airport ticks many boxes in this respect, and where it does so I openly applaud them. But there are shortcomings in a couple of specific areas of the business, and I do urge improvement in these. Though I realise the risk I take by doing so on here. When praising MAG one is called out as a happy clapper / cheerleader; when criticising one is denounced as a "[freight] troll". I have experience on both sides of that divide (dependent on topic), so I'm used to being hit with both forms of abuse! :-)

But yes, MAG's agenda does differ from mine in one essential respect. Their primary agenda is to maximise profit to their group bottom line - the interests of the region are secondary to this in the view of MAG executives. My agenda flips this: I welcome a healthy and profitable MAG, but not at the expense of short-changing their wider responsibilities to the NW regional economy. So I do understand their view. I just happen to disagree with certain elements of it, as do some other regular posters on here. I don't for one moment expect MAG policy to be even remotely influenced by debates on public forums, but that doesn't mean that exchange of ideas should be dismissed by self-appointed objectors on here. It is far better to (respectfully) join a discussion than to post little digs and tell other participants to get lost.

Once again, I didn't start the cargo discussion originally, and I didn't resurrect it more recently. I have responded to others and joined in. I'm prepared to contribute again if new points are raised. If not, the ground is covered. But let's all try to keep it civilised.

Happy New Year from me to all contributors here whether you agree with my points or not. And RIP to the great friend who really did raise the cargo discussion back in April. One who contributed to the success of MAN throughout his career and worked tirelessly for the best interests of the airport throughout his years based at MAN.

[Navpi]

Ex Cargo Clown

In that case EMA is presumably losing money and a drain on MAG resources.

[Downwind_Left]

Are you deliberately misinterpreting what Ex Cargo Clown wrote?
He didn’t say cargo was a massive loss maker and drain on resources, he said there’s not a huge amount of money to be made.

In that respect you also have to consider volumes. STN and EMA both have huge amounts of freight-only traffic from the big operators; DHL, FedEx and UPS. Plus main deck capacity from the likes of Asiana, Cargolux and Qatar etc. Both airports together handed 5 times the amount as Manchester in 2019, and have the volume of freight traffic and spare capacity to make it worthwhile and profitable. The majority of Manchester’s fright traffic has been belly capacity on passenger flights in recent years... modern aircraft such as the A330/350 and B777/787 have so much belly capacity for cargo that the need for dedicated freighter service is much reduced in all but the largest markets.

To put it in perspective, here are the CAA stats for freight traffic for 2019. I’m only reproducing airports handling over 15 000T of freight, figure underneath each tonnage is percentage change vs previous year.

London Heathrow
1 587 486T
-7%

East Midlands
335 948T
+/-0%

London Stansted
224 139T
-1%

London Gatwick
110 358T
-2%

Manchester
108 382T
-5%

London Luton
35 761T
+37%

Birmingham
29 866T
-11%

Belfast International
25 095T
-9%

Edinburgh
19 410T
-5%

Doncaster
17 647T
+148%

So take away points from the above data are as follows;

• Freight volumes at STN and EMA are huge in comparison to MAN. And most of theirs is dedicated freight service rather than passenger belly capacity. They have the economies of scale to handle these flights.
• Freight across the board was generally declining in volume. A lot of airlines have been in the process of ending their dedicated freighter operations because of depressed yields resulting from increased belly capacity.
• Doncaster are clearly going after this market as they have a large and very quiet airfield, with TUI and Wizz Air being the only significant operators
• Manchester have been more keen on passenger capacity, and the huge freight potential in the holds of those flights
• In the biggest recession aviation has ever seen, no company is going to invest huge sums in equipment and staff training to handle the odd one-off ad hoc freighter flight. It would be the handling agent that would bear that cost. The airport wouldn’t get much other than the landing fee. What would be in it for either Swissport/Menzies Cargo or the Airport? Everyone in aviation is trying to minimise cash burn at the moment. Any spending must be justified for return on investment.
• It’s irrational to expect that Manchester and its handling agents should attempt to handle dedicated freighters at all costs.
• It’s irrational to assume that all such capacity is desperate to use Manchester, and would only utilise Doncaster or East Midlands (or any other UK airport) because Manchester didn’t want the business.

The truth is Manchester didn’t have the space to handle dedicated freighters on any scale pre-COVID, nor the demand. Now things have changed, it’s not worth the handling agents throwing huge investment at a sector to gain a bit of incremental revenue. If Etihad wanted to operate a daily 777F to Manchester for the next 3 years and were willing to place a contract with a handling agent accordingly I’m sure you’d see a different answer.

[CabinCrewe]

what a lot of fuss about (essentially) nothing

[OzzyOzBorn]

Did you glean this opinion from all the handling agency staff who have been made redundant?

[BHX5DME]

Some snow at MAN this morning meant Virgin went to LHR and Qatar to BHX

[BHX5DME]

Turkish to AYT / DLM now bookable both daily 14:30 & 12:00

Great news for Manchester

[bar none]

Which Airline? Sun Express?

[Sioltach Dubh Glas]

If you're referring to the new Turkish flights then, as stated, they are by Turkish Airlines and not Sun Express.

​​

[Playamar2]

Turkish flights are not bookable on their website yet. The AYT flight will probably be Sun Express which is a joint venture with Turkish Airlines. Twice a week from 26th March going up to 4 weekly from 30th May. Happy to be proved wrong with a link to a reliable source.

[The96er]

The message to the Handling agents is that they will be Turkish Airlines.

[BHX5DME]

They are both bookable on Google Flights on Turkish Airlines

[Suzeman]

AFAIK, Sun Express will also operate to MAN in S2021

Info from Sean M @SeanM1997 twitter who seems to be a reliable source

Sun Express - Antalya to Manchester. Flights start 26 March 2021

XQ594 AYT 1425-1725 MAN (Mon & Fri)
XQ595 MAN 1820-0055+1 AYT (Mon & Fri)
Wednesday and Sunday flights added from 30 May 2021

[Mr A Tis]

MAN SNOCLO last couple of hours (still closed). Fortunately not many movements scheduled. 2 Divs to LPL & 1 to BHX so far, with KLM & Etihad giving pax an extended tour of Blackburn.

[TURIN]

Originally Posted by CabinCrewe

what a lot of fuss about (essentially) nothing

Best comment for about a week!

Did you glean this opinion from all the handling agency staff who have been made redundant?

I genuinely have the utmost sympathy for those many thousands who have either lost their jobs or been furloughed for the last year or so (I'm one of them by the way). However, how many staff have lost their jobs at MAN as a direct result of a cut in CARGO ONLY flights? Genuine question, honestly, FedEx is the only one that springs to mind and they are still operating into MAN. Are there others?

Merry Christmas to everyone and lets hope for a prosperous new Year.

From what I can see, it is the massive cuts in scheduled and charter flights that has ruined this industry, not a lack of cargo flights.

[Flightrider]

I've been watching the debate on cargo for the last few days, and one or two recent posts have prompted a response.

Turin, you are absolutely right that it's the massive cuts in scheduled and charter flights that have laid the industry low. However, many airports and airlines struggling as a result have taken to cargo-only flights as a means of offsetting that downturn. I doubt that one very sizeable and well-known UK airline would still be here in December 2020 were it not for the amount of cargo-only operations that it has flown. The point is, I believe, not whether there have been job losses as a result of the alleged MAN/MAG policy towards cargo, but whether jobs put at risk through the passenger side could have been saved if a different approach had been taken on cargo. Reading all of this, it certainly sounds as though there is a case to answer.

If MAG have been directing cargo to EMA, and several cargo operations have politely declined that offer and gone to Liverpool, Doncaster and elsewhere instead, then it is fair for those who wish to see their airport bounce back from this pandemic as quickly as possible to feel somewhat aggrieved. For those whose jobs depend on the airport, they have cause to feel even more aggrieved. In this case, it is a matter for MAG to make decisions and for airlines to react to them. The MAG policy seems misguided and short-sighted to me. A debate on PPruNe won't change that, but I have every sympathy with those who believe they are seeing opportunities pass the airport by and are getting rather upset about the impact on an airport about which they care deeply, and upon which many depend for a living.

[1-11days]

Some good points raised all round on the cargo debate. It does seem that as under floor freight capacity has fallen with the drastic reduction in passenger flights there is a need for it to be replaced with all freight capability at least for a temporary period, maybe one or two years perhaps? In a world where MAN now has more apron and runway space along with cargo facilities it would seem appropriate to reassess their strategy of cross selling to EMA/STN if they are starting to lose traffic out of the MAG group. I suppose it depends partly on how long until MAG think MAN will be apron / slot constrained again and how much revenue they reckon they will lose through leakage to non MAG airports.
As a question to those who know more about yield etc does anyone have any sense of how much our long haul operators get profit from underfloor freight versus the passengers on top, thinking routes like Addis for example? So might we see long haul coming back quicker more because of underfloor freight than due to passenger numbers?

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Scottish Airports used to do this as well and it caused no end of grief locally but there was a strategic rationale in managing the limited demand. PIK was long haul and GLA was short haul business and holiday traffic leaving EDI with limited business and very limited holiday flights. The group funneled traffic where they thought best and invested accordingly, when that strategy was challenged in court, GLA got long haul and major investment and PIK was sold off. However the eventual winner in the long run was EDI, but only when it was decoupled from the wider group and sold off to be a direct competitor to GLA. The group had, albeit with understandable intentions, constrained demand at EDI to boost GLA. Once they became effective competitors, traffic which had been growing at EDI exploded. What's in GLA's interests wasn't in EDI's.

There's something similar going in with MAG IMHO.