Southampton-3
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: .
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SKOJB
I would say it is incredibly unlikely. I think Southampton will prove to be successful for them and a nice little niche market but I'm not sure it will be persuade them into going full time. I'm not sure LCY is behind with capacity, quite the opposite in fact at the moment?
BACF are, ultimately, only there because of the weekday restrictions at City and the the crewing nightmares they had with the Bristol and Birmingham and Manchester operations. Being stuck in a taxi from Bristol back to LCY airport after a busy weekend flying is not the best way to achieve a harmonious crew!
If City ever goes 7 days a week I'm sure they will probably focus their entire operation from there and stop with the weekend ops from other airports.
I would say it is incredibly unlikely. I think Southampton will prove to be successful for them and a nice little niche market but I'm not sure it will be persuade them into going full time. I'm not sure LCY is behind with capacity, quite the opposite in fact at the moment?
BACF are, ultimately, only there because of the weekday restrictions at City and the the crewing nightmares they had with the Bristol and Birmingham and Manchester operations. Being stuck in a taxi from Bristol back to LCY airport after a busy weekend flying is not the best way to achieve a harmonious crew!
If City ever goes 7 days a week I'm sure they will probably focus their entire operation from there and stop with the weekend ops from other airports.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What’s the journey length from SOU to LCY by taxi versus BRS?
There is no competition at SOU, so they’ll definitely do a lot better on the revenue front, bur surely the crew complexity will be similar to the other issues they had in the U.K. Regions.
There is no competition at SOU, so they’ll definitely do a lot better on the revenue front, bur surely the crew complexity will be similar to the other issues they had in the U.K. Regions.
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cavokblues - what I meant by behind with capacity was can you see an immediate return to business travel volumes at LCY, reduced demand post Covid is surely a given and fleet utilisation will still be key?
LGS6753
They were a complete failure last time around, what make you believe anything has changed, given that with a bit of imagination anything that can be done in a freeport can be achieved in a bonded warehouse?
They were a complete failure last time around, what make you believe anything has changed, given that with a bit of imagination anything that can be done in a freeport can be achieved in a bonded warehouse?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question on performance from SOU's longer runway
I'm sure I have asked this before but I can't find the exact post or reference but can anyone help clarify whether, with the new extension, SOU's runway would allow unlimited payloads on A320/737 type aircraft to the Canary Islands/Turkey/Cyprus?
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure with a 738 but A320 took a 10/15 seat hit from SEN when operating to TFS (SEN runway being comparable with SOU extended)
Last edited by SKOJB; 11th Mar 2021 at 10:52.
Even pre runway starter strip days, the B737-300/400 and 700 had little problems going in or out of SOU to Spain and the Canaries.
Not so the slippery fish of the 737-800NG at SOU which does not operate from SOU.
Have to say that Jersey has seen both the 738NG and the new MAX-8 of Smartwings fly from their 5700' runway to Malaga & Tenerife.
I do not think JER has any clearway issues like SOU?
As mentioned above, EasyJet and also Air Malta had a payload restriction out of SEN (TORA 6000') on their A320's to MLA, CFU and The Canaries, of losing between 10-20 seats.
Air Malta did route some A320 flights via Sardinia and Sicily IIRC to off set this, but sales were poor.
EasyJet Airbus A321NEO had flights from London Southend Airport until they stopped all Ops there. Not sure of the destinations flown but I saw the performance of one there last year and it was rather impressive to say the least. EZY were tending to base more Neo a/c at SEN.
SOU's OLS/OBSTACLE LIMITATION REQUIREMENTS with current issues are TODA = Takeoff Distance Available = The TORA Takeoff Run available, plus the length of any remaining clearway beyond the end of the TORA.
Marhill Copse is located immediately south of Southampton Airport’s runway in a critical location with regards to Approach and Take-off/climb.
All in SOU's to-do-list in their Master Plan.
Not so the slippery fish of the 737-800NG at SOU which does not operate from SOU.
Have to say that Jersey has seen both the 738NG and the new MAX-8 of Smartwings fly from their 5700' runway to Malaga & Tenerife.
I do not think JER has any clearway issues like SOU?
As mentioned above, EasyJet and also Air Malta had a payload restriction out of SEN (TORA 6000') on their A320's to MLA, CFU and The Canaries, of losing between 10-20 seats.
Air Malta did route some A320 flights via Sardinia and Sicily IIRC to off set this, but sales were poor.
EasyJet Airbus A321NEO had flights from London Southend Airport until they stopped all Ops there. Not sure of the destinations flown but I saw the performance of one there last year and it was rather impressive to say the least. EZY were tending to base more Neo a/c at SEN.
SOU's OLS/OBSTACLE LIMITATION REQUIREMENTS with current issues are TODA = Takeoff Distance Available = The TORA Takeoff Run available, plus the length of any remaining clearway beyond the end of the TORA.
Marhill Copse is located immediately south of Southampton Airport’s runway in a critical location with regards to Approach and Take-off/climb.
All in SOU's to-do-list in their Master Plan.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dorset
Posts: 672
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 737-400 didn't work on SOU runway at all. I seem to remember that Air Europa used to end up tech-stopping Nantes in the couple of years they did a SOU-TFS charter.
I'd doubt the -300 can do it but a -700 with the right engines could almost certainly do it.
I'd doubt the -300 can do it but a -700 with the right engines could almost certainly do it.
Planning
Planning decision, Eastleigh Borough Council will decide on the runway extension plans on 25th March
Why we need the runway extension -
So, if you support the airport, please consider emailing the following members of Eastleigh Borough Council before 25th March, to explain why you back the runway plans. You can find their contact details below:
support or object here -
https://www.southamptonairport.com/r...Iho4Us4E#21732
Why we need the runway extension -
So, if you support the airport, please consider emailing the following members of Eastleigh Borough Council before 25th March, to explain why you back the runway plans. You can find their contact details below:
support or object here -
https://www.southamptonairport.com/r...Iho4Us4E#21732
Albert Hall
I believe that this was a first generation B737-800 way before the SFP option was available. A tech stop in northern Spain was always necessary with the ability to route TFS-SOU direct on the northbound leg.
The problem was the weight penalty incurred by reporting of a wet runway which on at least two occasions resulted in the northbound flights diverting due to the landing weight being too great for the available LDA with a wet runway. While this is still the case there may be light on the horizon.
As of 4 November this year the new ICAO Global Reporting Format (GRF) comes in to operation for reporting of "contaminated" runways. Whereas there currently is an automatic weight penalty incurred when a wet runway is reported, when GRF comes in it appears that reporting of a wet runway will not incur a penalty unless braking coefficient measurements indicate that the runway is "slippery wet". Maybe there is a performance expert out there who can con confirm this?
I believe that this was a first generation B737-800 way before the SFP option was available. A tech stop in northern Spain was always necessary with the ability to route TFS-SOU direct on the northbound leg.
The problem was the weight penalty incurred by reporting of a wet runway which on at least two occasions resulted in the northbound flights diverting due to the landing weight being too great for the available LDA with a wet runway. While this is still the case there may be light on the horizon.
As of 4 November this year the new ICAO Global Reporting Format (GRF) comes in to operation for reporting of "contaminated" runways. Whereas there currently is an automatic weight penalty incurred when a wet runway is reported, when GRF comes in it appears that reporting of a wet runway will not incur a penalty unless braking coefficient measurements indicate that the runway is "slippery wet". Maybe there is a performance expert out there who can con confirm this?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Guernsey
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will be interesting to see what happens on the Guernsey route, only had a quick look but it looks like Blue Islands will be offering up to 29 return flights per week (4x daily apart from Friday when there will be 5 daily) this summer between Guernsey and Southampton and 20 per week during the winter (3 daily, apart from 2 on Saturdays) so looks like we'll end up with overcapacity on the route and more seats than what will be available between Guernsey and Gatwick.
Jersey - Southampton however will have less than half that capacity - 22 per week during the summer (x3 daily except x4 on Fridays) and 21 per week during the winter - (3 daily)
Jersey - Southampton however will have less than half that capacity - 22 per week during the summer (x3 daily except x4 on Fridays) and 21 per week during the winter - (3 daily)
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well it means if the Councillors reject it there are good grounds for an appeal - which will take another 12 months.
I get that longer runway allows greater flexibility of aircraft use, and that pilots see this as job security. I'm not looking for "you are anti-aviation and should be banned from this website" comments.
However, I'm struggling to pick out many airlines, given their current and planned fleet, where this extension is really going to add this flexibility or allow new routes to be opened
Can someone nominate some credible specific airline-aircraft-route triple combinations that would become enabled by this runway extension ?
Yes, that includes factoring in that a 1h flight needs less fuel, so less runway is required to depart, compared to a 4h flight. A 777 from SOU to NYC off no more than 1900m is for dreamers and not commercially credible
There will be a battle with the environmental crowd - clear, strong and specific arguments will be needed for a longer runway. Details of those new potential routes are a good way of convincing minds; shouting at people that they are stupid won't win the argument
However, I'm struggling to pick out many airlines, given their current and planned fleet, where this extension is really going to add this flexibility or allow new routes to be opened
Can someone nominate some credible specific airline-aircraft-route triple combinations that would become enabled by this runway extension ?
Yes, that includes factoring in that a 1h flight needs less fuel, so less runway is required to depart, compared to a 4h flight. A 777 from SOU to NYC off no more than 1900m is for dreamers and not commercially credible
There will be a battle with the environmental crowd - clear, strong and specific arguments will be needed for a longer runway. Details of those new potential routes are a good way of convincing minds; shouting at people that they are stupid won't win the argument
Last edited by davidjohnson6; 17th Mar 2021 at 15:34.