Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

Southampton-3

Old 7th Oct 2021, 12:26
  #581 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Belfast
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Did some at T3 used to work for DANAIR Metropolitan of the 1980s. A bit bonkers the schedule but good to see the BHD twice a day of sorts.
Alteagod is online now  
Old 7th Oct 2021, 18:13
  #582 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All this is further encouraging news,but with things opening up for 2022,I feel the airport could be left in the side lines with the restricted runway length.
With fuel costs spiralling the need for larger economic aircraft becomes a necessity,With no further news on the runway extension and forthcoming legal challenge,things look challenging for the airport management.
RW20 is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 07:18
  #583 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This morning, Sat 9th Oct, is the reality.... a little fog in the area. Up above the aeroplanes fly in frustrating circles.... unable to land. Bournemouth traffic is unaffected because of the superior landing aids/approach lighting systems/runway length. Do you really think an extra couple of metres of runway will make a difference? Time for a reality check. Remember Air Berlin!
055166k is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 08:20
  #584 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Granted Bournemouth (on 26) has lower minima compared to SOU, but the operators also need to be approved for CAT 2 / CAT 3 approaches. Does Eastern, Aurigny, Blue Islands, Loganair, City Flyer etc have CAT2 approval? None maybe except City Flyer would have CAT3 (and then i very much doubt they do) so the comparison between SOU and BOH is irrelevant in this instance. The extension will only benefit, maybe it will attract new operators but the reality is the CURRENT operators will benefit the most, a constant trend on this thread is that the runway extension will bring in all these new operators, forgetting the current users who lets be realistic have certainly helped (as much as they could) the airport throughout the toughest time aviation has seen.

Bournemouth and Southampton are two very different airports that can / do operate together well. Bournemouth has a lot of ancillary business, with Cargo, Draken, GAMA, JETS etc and a primarily leisure focused scheduled airline network. Southampton is a primarily business / commuting airport, with only a very small 'other' type operations such as Jetworks. The airport also has the benefit of the lifeline routes to the channel islands and is the primary link for the channel islands air ambulances. Southampton is Southampton and Bournemouth is Bournemouth, neither will ever be the other and why should they?
wanna is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 08:26
  #585 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,675
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
In the blue corner.... in the red corner...
davidjohnson6 is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 08:44
  #586 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Received 4 Likes on 1 Post
wanna

Your assertion is incorrect. At least one of the operators you have listed is equipped, trained and approved for CAT II.
L1011effoh is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 09:20
  #587 (permalink)  
V_2
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Cityflyer’s entire fleet was Cat 3 autoland capable. With the “new” aircraft from China being Cat 2 man land only and the 170s leaving, the Cat 3 ratio approaches 50%. (Although in my experience not sure I’ve ever done a Cat 3 approach where I wouldn’t have got in with Cat 2 minima.)
V_2 is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 09:24
  #588 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Loganair Embraers are Cat II and the ATRs are expected to be any day now.
Saabdriver1 is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 10:31
  #589 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Am I right in thinking SOU will never be any more than CAT1 because of runway width?
SKOJB is online now  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 10:41
  #590 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The future of course is not ILS, RNAV is already beneficial to Southampton.
Buster the Bear is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 11:45
  #591 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The EMB 145 might need up to an additional 15% of runway in low visibility as it might need to use reduced flap settings, and bear in mind that RW20 has a displaced threshold.... which the proposed runway extension will not affect. Previous comments reflect a good common sense attitude.
055166k is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 12:06
  #592 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Which your original post clearly did not. SOU may not have the perfect instrumentation set up but i'm sure it will cope just fine with any future opportunities that present themselves!
SKOJB is online now  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 13:34
  #593 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
L1011effoh

It was actually a question, im not to familiar with the ins and outs of the airlines listed. I would imagine City Flyer is CAT2 but the others... id be surprised.
wanna is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 14:07
  #594 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm actually pro Southampton big time. N88ZL Boeing 707 got in and out OK regularly, but the weather is not always kind, such as the Fokker 100 that slid off the end of RW20. Recent movements suggest the E135/145/170/190 types are ideal. Occasional A319/320 seem to be no problem but I would question the reliance on that size of aircraft for regular and frequent schedules. The Dash 8 still ticks all my boxes.
055166k is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 15:21
  #595 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southampton
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
hmm think you will find N88ZL used hurn. There has never been a 707 in Southampton. The replacement BBJ VP-BZL visited once as far as I can remember.
zantopst is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 15:42
  #596 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SORRY.... AGED MEMORY FAILURE.. apologies.
055166k is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 16:50
  #597 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 75
Posts: 2,694
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SKOJB

That is correct.
Expressflight is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 19:20
  #598 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SOU will only be CAT 1,and with a very high 20 RVR of 800 mtrs or more for landing ,it must be the worst regional airport for poor visability operations.
additional to this 02 minimal has been raised again to about 500 feet due to the RNAV withdrawn of LPV approaches.
Not the best of aids for any airline to consider with the runway extension in the future pipeline.
RW20 is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2021, 07:03
  #599 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: 50+ north
Posts: 1,248
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
SKOJB

IMHO no, contrary to that posted at 597 the reason for the current, and possible future, operation at CAT 1 is due to the lack of a full (ie 900 metre) approach lighting system on RWY 20 together with obstacles in the final approach area. The presence of the latter will preclude significant lowering of the Descision Height (ie the point at which a missed approach must be initiated) therefore it is not financially viable to extend the approach light system to faciltate adoption of something better than CAT 1.RVR minima.

The issue of runway width is only applicable for Code 1 & 2 precision runways which requires a minimum width of 30 metres (ref ICAO Annex 14) which SOU already has if it were applicable,

Has anyone any update of Aurigny having EVS (Enhanced Vision Systems) fitted to their ATRs? This was apparently being done to counter a similar approach minima problem at Guernsey and could accordingly be applied at SOU to enable a less than CAT 1 minima to be used.
TCAS FAN is online now  
Old 10th Oct 2021, 07:15
  #600 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,369
Received 355 Likes on 206 Posts
How often is the airport closed due to poor visibility? How many flights a year are affected??

if it's a low number there is no point in investing when there are a lot of alternatives relatively close by
Asturias56 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.