Southampton-3
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I recollect from the original, which I have no evidence to show that it has been amended, despite making several requests to EBC for a copy, it is overdue for a review, but in the current financial climate no doubt the question is "who pays?".
There is no longer a need for the Section 106 to ban Concorde or B747s from using the airport. Albeit we did get both within a few hundred feet of the runway on a number of occasions!
The main focus of the original Section 106 was noise, which with the advent of the A320 Neos and others is a fraction of what we had when it was first written.
Due to the night movement restrictions specified in the 106 the ATC manning was/is tailored to it, with little or no flexibility (due to duty time limitations) to cover delayed arrivals. These I believe are in fact permitted under the current agreement, the requirement being that they are not originally scheduled after 2300HR. It was/is inevitably the non-availability of ATC staff that has caused diversions of late arrivals..
Last edited by TCAS FAN; 26th Oct 2022 at 08:14.
Didn't operating hours come up again in the recent runway extension application process? Applying for extended hours now just seems like a way of re-opening the recent arguments, and will be interpreted as acting in bad faith.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Waters edge
Posts: 446
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FF
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The S106 that will sit alongside the runway extension continues with current operating hours (0600-2300) although I believe there is an adjustment for an increase in 1st wave of departures between 0600-0700, assuming to entice a LCC. Doesn’t however change closing times at the back end of the day!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southampton
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, but how many times does it have to be said......a LCC will not open a base at SOU, due to, the lack of CAT3 ILS, the above mentioned 106 agreement relating to operating hours and not to mention, even with alterations, the size of the terminal facilities. A possibility of W patterns yes, but a very slim chance at that.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, but how many times does it have to be said......a LCC will not open a base at SOU, due to, the lack of CAT3 ILS, the above mentioned 106 agreement relating to operating hours and not to mention, even with alterations, the size of the terminal facilities. A possibility of W patterns yes, but a very slim chance at that.
In FF's post 1026 he states
So the 2018 profit was based on short haul regional flying and a smattering of charters.
The losses since then are down to Flybe and Covid. SOU has recovered slower than other airports due to the loss of BE, but the evidence seems to be there that those gaps are being filled by LM, EIR etc. The runway extension will benefit those flights and might also see an increase in charters and W flights like EZY's ski flights. There'll also be a contribution from new business park.
I don't see a LCC base as the be all and end all
The Airport's financial reports are in the public domain. - using companies house filings. It made more than £11m profit in 2018 on a revenue of £30m or so - a good business - but since then has lost heavily:
The losses since then are down to Flybe and Covid. SOU has recovered slower than other airports due to the loss of BE, but the evidence seems to be there that those gaps are being filled by LM, EIR etc. The runway extension will benefit those flights and might also see an increase in charters and W flights like EZY's ski flights. There'll also be a contribution from new business park.
I don't see a LCC base as the be all and end all
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southampton
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The future is as it has been up until now, continued UK connectivity with a few bucket and spade routes thrown in, agreed the extension will allow for more of both of the above, but at what levels we'll have to wait and see.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southampton
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If / when the extension is completed I would be fairly surprised if EZY didn't dip their toe in the pond with a FAO and / or AGP or PMI based frame visting 2-3 times a week for at least a summer.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
70 min from the railway station opposite the terminal into central London. Southampton has a huge huge catchment area just based upon the stops on that line.
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If TUI and RYR can base a single aircraft each at BOH and perform successfully with very limited public transport infrastructure, then I see no reason why they can’t also replicate the same at SOU (post extension) with a few select routes utilising the excellent road and rail links
Last edited by SKOJB; 26th Oct 2022 at 21:53.
What would an easyJet and a Ryanair departure do to the terminal? At 186 + 189 that's 375 seats, or 5 x Q400s in olde world flybe terms. Now if you did have 5 Q400s and/or ATRs boarding at peak morning rush and and only the two jets above in addition, that's equivalent to TEN Q400s at once. So your BAU props and the beginnings of wished for loco business, what does that do to your CX? (customer experience)
Basically what they're chasing needs a new terminal for jets and not just a longer runway. IF that's what they need.
Basically what they're chasing needs a new terminal for jets and not just a longer runway. IF that's what they need.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What would an easyJet and a Ryanair departure do to the terminal? At 186 + 189 that's 375 seats, or 5 x Q400s in olde world flybe terms. Now if you did have 5 Q400s and/or ATRs boarding at peak morning rush and and only the two jets above in addition, that's equivalent to TEN Q400s at once. So your BAU props and the beginnings of wished for loco business, what does that do to your CX? (customer experience)
Basically what they're chasing needs a new terminal for jets and not just a longer runway. IF that's what they need.
Basically what they're chasing needs a new terminal for jets and not just a longer runway. IF that's what they need.
Worth noting they did manage ok when Flybe had 3x E195's based there, generally arriving and departing at quite similar times - 3x 118 seats is similar to the 2x 738/320 scenario. Of course beyond two of these that question comes back around...
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a terminal extension planned a few years ago as well, quite ambitious by the looks of it - adding a full second floor to the departure lounge area.
Worth noting they did manage ok when Flybe had 3x E195's based there, generally arriving and departing at quite similar times - 3x 118 seats is similar to the 2x 738/320 scenario. Of course beyond two of these that question comes back around...
Worth noting they did manage ok when Flybe had 3x E195's based there, generally arriving and departing at quite similar times - 3x 118 seats is similar to the 2x 738/320 scenario. Of course beyond two of these that question comes back around...
