Southampton-3

[SWBKCB]

That low level fog is the worst sort! 👍

[Cazza_fly]

Originally Posted by LTNman

https://www.itv.com/news/meridian/20...hts-at-airport




Now why would outbound flights be unable to take off unless it was particularly thick? What are the minimums for both take off and landings at either end with the new runway length?

Most outbound flights will have been on aircraft that needed to make an inbound landing... its the way its worded.

[EI-BUD]

Originally Posted by Albert Hall

One of the most ridiculous debates on here for some time. There is a rumour about Ryanair launching a new UK airport, someone says that their money would be on SOU-DUB without any foundation that it's even a rumour, and it becomes a rumour. What a total load of tosh.

The Ryanair @ Norwich rumour seems to be an actual rumour and given that they already fly at two of the three airports in the same group - BOH and EXT - this might be realistic.

But as for Ryanair on SOU-DUB, I'd not even waste the airspace to discuss it.

A limited easyJet programme at SOU for S24, on the other hand.....

Ryanair had scheduled services ex NWI in the past. I'd be inclined to agree that FR unlikely to turn up at SOU, however, it is tantalising for them, the prospect of getting onto a route operated by EI or Emerald. I mean they couldn't resist Kerry/ Dublin, which has awful loads at super low prices. Many more examples; NQY, CWL (ex BFS, now being axed) and a list more besides.

[adfly]

SOU W23/24 Summary

I've taken a couple of different weeks to get a rough idea of some frequency variations, but it is unlikely to be exact. Compared to last winter there is some notable extra capacity from Aer Lingus, easyJet and Loganair, although there are reductions from Eastern (I think, very hard to work out what they actually operated last winter as there was lots of chopping and changing) and Blue Islands (to Guernsey). There's also an increase from KLM (last winter wasn't a consistent 14 weekly service) and minor reduction from BA (Salzburg dropped). Overall it appears to be a step in the right direction.

Passenger numbers from Jan to Aug inclusive are presently 501,886 from the CAA stats, which I would guess (with my finger firmly in the wind) leads to a full year number in the region of 750,000, which is about a 20% increase on 2022.

Aer Lingus Regional

Belfast City - 13-19 weekly AT7
Dublin - 13 weekly AT7

Aurigny

Alderney - 14 weekly D28
Guernsey - 7 weekly AT7

BA Cityflyer

Bergerac - 1 weekly E90 (only a few dates)
Chambery - 2 weekly E90
Edinburgh - 1 weekly E90

Blue Islands

Guernsey - 9 weekly AT7
Jersey - 21 weekly AT7

Eastern Airways

Paris Orly - 7 weekly AT7

easyJet

Belfast International (New) - 3 weekly 320 (from 29/10)
Geneva - 6-7 weekly 320
Glasgow (New) - 2 weekly 319 (from 02/11)

KLM

Amsterdam - 14 weekly E75/E90

Loganair

Edinburgh - 21-25 weekly ER4
Glasgow - 21-24 weekly ER4
Newcastle - 12-13 weekly ER4


Summary

167 - 180 weekly departures
24 - 26 daily departures


For comparison's sake, here is the planned operation from the start of the last pre pandemic winter (W19/20):

Aurigny

Alderney - 14 weekly D28
Guernsey - 12-13 weekly AT4


easyJet Switzerland

Geneva - 2-3 weekly 319/20


Flybe (5-6 Q400 Based)

Amsterdam - 29-33 weekly Q400
Belfast City - 15 weekly Q400
Bergerac - 2-3 weekly Q400
Chambery - 2 weekly Q400
Dublin - 24 weekly Q400
Edinburgh - 26-27 weekly Q400/E75
Geneva - 3 weekly Q400
Glasgow - 25-27 weekly Q400
Guernsey - 19-25 weekly AT4/7 (Blue Islands)
Jersey - 30 weekly Q400 / AT4/7 (Blue Islands)
Leeds/Bradford - 15 weekly J41 (Eastern)
Manchester - 36 weekly Q400/E75
Newcastle - 16-18 weekly Q400
Paris CDG - 15 weekly Q400


Overall

Flybe weekly departures: 257-271 (W18/19 - 228-282)
Other airline weekly departures: 30-31 (W18/19 - 27-35)
Overall weekly departures: 287-302 (W18/19 - 255-317)
Overall average daily departures: 41-43 (W18/19 - 36-45)

[SKOJB]

Great work as always adfly. One glaring omission from todays schedule is MAN and wonder if this will return any time soon. There must be a need for it surely!

[ETOPS]

One glaring omission from todays schedule is MAN and wonder if this will return any time soon

Having done this by train recently I can confirm the CrossCountry journey takes 4hrs 15mins and isn’t very comfortable. Can’t believe this route hasn’t restarted..

[TartinTon]

Originally Posted by SKOJB

Great work as always adfly. One glaring omission from todays schedule is MAN and wonder if this will return any time soon. There must be a need for it surely!

I thought Logan were in the frame for that route? Didn't they apply for a 3/4 a day slot pool on that route for Winter? Not enough aircraft available maybe?

[Sotonsean]

Stand realignment

Does anyone have any further information regarding the recent works connected with the "cul-de-sac" and realignment of stands 1 to 5.

Nothing online or on the airports social media regarding the works taken out. I'd be interested to know if the works have been completed. I'm fully aware of the stands being realigned but I would also be interested to know what other changes were made.

With the realignment of stands 1 to 5 taking place I wonder if the next phase will include the construction of the northern taxiway 🤔

[jensdad]

Great stuff, adfly, thanks for posting.
The standout change for me as opposed to W19/20 is the reduction in Guernsey (a route I've used myself several times connecting from NCL) from between 31 & 38 per week to just 16 now? Very surprising to see.

[TCAS FAN]

Originally Posted by Sotonsean

Does anyone have any further information regarding the recent works connected with the "cul-de-sac" and realignment of stands 1 to 5.

Nothing online or on the airports social media regarding the works taken out. I'd be interested to know if the works have been completed. I'm fully aware of the stands being realigned but I would also be interested to know what other changes were made.

With the realignment of stands 1 to 5 taking place I wonder if the next phase will include the construction of the northern taxiway 🤔

As previously speculated on this thread, and confirmed by a current NOTAM, the area formerly used for Stands 1-5 has been re-configured into four Stands numbered 2-5, which have now been brought into use.

While dimensions have not as yet been formally published it is highly probable that these will accommodate simultaneous parking of A320/B737.

From the limited information provided by the NOTAM it would appear that new surface markings have been applied, but vertical Stand designator signage is still to be installed.

[Sotonsean]

Originally Posted by TCAS FAN

As previously speculated on this thread, and confirmed by a current NOTAM, the area formerly used for Stands 1-5 has been re-configured into four Stands numbered 2-5, which have now been brought into use.

While dimensions have not as yet been formally published it is highly probable that these will accommodate simultaneous parking of A320/B737.

From the limited information provided by the NOTAM it would appear that new surface markings have been applied, but vertical Stand designator signage is still to be installed.

Many thanks for the quick response TCAS it's appreciated especially by yourself.

I had noticed the limited information provided by the NOTAM hence why I put out a request for any further information. It was the dimensions I was rather interested in. Also if any other changes were made such as the holding area's for airside equipment.

[adfly]

Stands 2-4

The ACL S24 capacity declaration gives some additional information. https://www.acl-uk.org/wp-content/up...Capacities.pdf

States stands 2-5 are suitable for 737 6-900, A318-21, MD80-88 and the 757 (not convinced about the latter as it is a Code D aircraft vs Code C for the others, it's pretty irrelevant regardless).

EDIT: actually 2 and 3 and 5J-M and 4 and 5 are 5JW. If W = wide then maybe those stands are a little wider.

jensdad I am also surprised by this. I'm sure even last winter the frequency was more like 21-22 weekly.

[SouthernAlliance]

The airport has submitted another application for Marlhill Copse tree reduction/removal, this time adding weight by using the Civil Aviation Act and the need for obstacle clearance safety, this may go through!

[LTNman]

Some of those trees have preservation orders on them. If it was such an issue maybe they should have thought of that before commencing the extension?

[willy wombat]

Just because a tree has a TPO it doesn’t mean it can never be reduced in size or felled. It means you have to get permission to do so which may or may not be granted depending on the individual case.

[inOban]

Surely the trees in a copse would in the past have been regularly coppiced?

[SKOJB]

Flying over them in to 02 recently made me realise how close you are now to the tops of these trees. Something needs to be done!

[Sotonsean]

The reasons why these trees remain a constant issue is mainly due to the fact that the most contentious of people who were against the runway extension live within the area where the trees are located.

The residents of Marhill Way which is adjacent to Marlhill Copse. They have been opposed to the trees being shortened or cut down for years. This has been an ongoing situation with the residents of Marhill Way ever since I can remember.

But I honestly think that the trees concerned will eventually be dealt with in one way or another.

LTNman are you getting bored with commenting on Airport car park fire's. Or are trees the new you 🤔

[SWBKCB]

this time adding weight by using the Civil Aviation Act and the need for obstacle clearance safety, this may go through!

Can somebody expand on this point raised by SouthernAlliance.

[LTNman]

More to do with what can be built in a safety zone rather than what already exists. Grandfather right?