Pamann
 

Well said !

Some people on here seem to think that everone in the UK live
and work in London, I hate LHR and LGW.

There are may people living in Hertfordshire, Essex, Suffolk and norfolk
who would rather fly from STN than LHR or LGW.

Its about time BA or VS the so called flag carriers start
giving people what they want, (local airport departures).

It's just the same thing on here everytime (as I've noticed over the years)....

Airline goes bust/cuts routes @ Luton = Oh How sad, my sympathy to all who've lost jobs, It should have worked, Luton is the center of the Universe!

Airline goes bust/cuts routes @ Stansted = SHAME!

Lot's of people who work in the city and Canary Wharf live in Essex, infact most of the work force at Canary Wharf commute from Essex so business traffic ex STN should be good. Not forgetting Cambridge and the rest of East Anglia, East, North East and North London. I do agree however that AA probably did go in to put EOS/Max out of business, but with EOS/Max gone then AA should at least be able to sustain a daily JFK (rather than the 2 proposed).

You watch now and no disrespect to anyone who works at SilverJet or due to travel, BUT if they go under this week that thread together with the Luton thread will read like a book of condolences. However AA pull out of STN and the same people will no doubt come and trample all over the Stansted thread with the same old comments (it was doomed to begin with.... and all the same old drivle).

Get over it and get on with it, if you don't like Stansted, don't fly from there however understand there is a huge amount of people who want to and do which makes it the UK's 3rd busiest airport, low fares or not. My fare to NY was more like £550 each return not a 1p plus tax, Zoom from LGW was £355 or similar so we can't just argue that it's ONLY low fares that attract people to use Stansted.

Right go on someone with an LU.. post code stick your two pennies worth in.:ugh:

Agree with all the latest comments I live in Norfolk & would always choose Stansted over any other London airport. We are going to Orlando in December & are having to travel to Gatwick & because of the distance/early check in we are having to travel down the night before.

Also funny how people who normally post good news on the Luton thread always seem to post the news of traffic reductions at Stansted:rolleyes:.

Sticking up for STN
 

Having worked at STN, now LHR. I can say STN looks like an airport unlike the tin can that is Luton. Luton is the one that sits up a dirt track. AKA the M1 and calling it London Luton what is all that about.
Gutted AA have given up. Day 1 of the route in Sat 2 was an interesting day.
But I am sure another US airline will be back to carry on. Maybe the new Delta/Northwest airline may give STN another go.
Just think when **** happens at any other airport, STN has to pick up what is left and deal with all the diverts.

Stansted will suffer as all the majors are able to carry more yield from Heathrow and now they all have access. Even Gatwick is losing US carries left right and centre with NWA, US and DL contracting and AA leaving. I use STN a lot flying Ryanair to PIK but in all honesty, it always strikes me as pretty downmarket and cheap. PLEASE DON'T FLAME ME but with so many passengers being Eastern Europe migrant workers it just has that vibe......( God that doesn't read well but it's true alas )

/Tin hat on. Head above parapet/

I'm one of those who supports Luton and denigrates Stansted. The reason? Stansted only exists because of monopolistic practices by the BAA. It is those practices that have damaged Luton over the years and prevented it from growing, as it certainly would have done if the industry had been left to market forces.

I certainly don't wish anyone out of their job (I've just suffered several months' unemployment myself), but Stansted has won much of its business unfairly, to the detriment of my local airport. I reckon I've got every right to feel aggrieved at that situation.

/Tin hat off. Duck to avoid incoming/

Its not looking good for Stansted is it. It won't be the UK's #3 for much longer I suspect.

Its not all doom and gloom !!!
 

Its not all doom and gloom here at Stansted, still looks very busy to me !!
Plenty of air traffic coming and going (passenger and cargo and private jets on northside)
All the airbridges are also being replaced, infact quite a lot of building and revamping going on.

Second that !
I spoke to someone high up in BAA this morning about the state
of aviation and how it was affecting STN, He told me that
BAA STN are in talks with five Airlines, three are almost certain
to launch routes this winter, the other two are in the early stages
of talks he would not name any athough one was hinted as being from
Asia guessing it to be AirAsiaX.

The loss of Maxjet, eos and AA wont make that big of an impact on STN position as number three.

And dont forget afew new airlines have started new routes his month alone.

Hey to all you Doom and Gloomers........get positive will ya and take a look over the Northside and just count all the Bizjets.......oh and bring a friend coz you will need use his fingers and toes as well.

All three FBO's have their ramps and hangars full, does'nt that show that people do like using Stansted.

BIZZYBOY

The Northside Business Aviation activity is totally irrelevant as far as airport growth is concerned. That's not where BAA make any significant income and will come and go in a flash. And if any part of it is required for Southside growth (e.g.Long Term Car Park) then there will be little reason not to reduce the operation regardless of how well it is doing.

How can it be irrelevant.....all those aircraft are parked on BAA concrete and paying top price parking rates.
These aircraft mainly come in and sit up for days or weeks sometimes months and they are mainly big jets, and this is all revenue for the BAA no outlay just pure revenue, they would earn a lot more having a B747 sitting on the tarmac there than a load of cars.
My point earlier was purely to tell you that people do want to use Stansted it wasn't about airport growth.

I agree Feroman - BAA do not see Northside as an area to develop for Business Aviation. It is an adhoc operation and therefore there is no future strategy in place for it. The Stansted future masterplans indicate some of the existing Northside to be used for car park extensions. All future developments for expansion are planned for southside, subject of course to planning approvals.

I agree with BIZZYBOY !

Money for no work and as for the Northside as a whole, its huge,
lots of space for new car parks and for biz-jet parking.

Lets get one thing straight, STN is growing and a slump in the
industry will not stop the growth or development going ahead.

whilst I don't disagree that some BAA income is gained from parking charges Northside, it is very much more from fare paying passengers and the additional money they spend in the main Terminal so that's where the focus is. And anyway, no parking revenue is gained from those aircraft that park on Harrod's or Inflite's ramp areas - and that tends to be most of them.

BTW - anyone noticed the new terminal extension is partly open now landside - no arriving passengers coming through that area yet until the end of June, but you can use the new loos and see how much bigger it will be. And I believe Immigration are putting in some new automated desks that will mean you can go through without queueing with everyone else. Maybe.

Most of the biz currently at Stansted are only there because they can't get into Luton. A number have been arriving at Luton to drop off the passengers and position to Stansted to park up.

Not a very good advert for Luton then is it!

completely agree but if the BAA are looking at business aviation as a whole who knows we may see some change in the development

I would not say most but yes some of the aircraft do come from Luton.
But what future development is there at Luton.........not much if any left, and with more and more business coming in its all positive for STN and not forgetting that STN handle a large amount of the worlds wide-bodied bizjets where all the other airports are restricted on what size can land.

So what is the airport's prime purpose then ? A naional transport resource or a revenue stream for BAA plc ?

It's a worthwhile point to consider because for many issues, such as noise for surrounding communities, or the ability to get Compulsory Purchase Orders for the new runway rather than having to negotiate with all the landowners, because that's cheaper, the attitude is that a national facility is being developed for the benefit of all, which would be fair enough if it was actually run as such. I don't care for this "now we're a national resource, now we are maximising our revenue" vacillation depending on the point at hand.

Its about time Stansted had a Madrid route. Ryanair just announced STN to MAD. That will be a winner and a permanent fixture from now on I'd expect. Still neesd the Canaries and a Paris route.

Yep, 2x daily MAD-STN-MAD using MAD-based machines.

For a LON to TLV trip in September, a booking engine pointed me to ISRAIR AIRLINES out of STN. I have never heard of them, could anyone enlightenment? Any feedback on service etc?

Thanks.

They have been flying into Stansted for a good while. A credible alternative to El-Al.

Not flown with them, but they seem reliable. Regulars out of Stansted using an A320 (max 174 passengers) departing 22:45 on a Wednesday or 20:50 on a Sunday. They are in direct competition to EL AL who tend to use B757s or B767s departing Fridays 09:45, but also have flights on some Mondays and Wednesdays.

Thanks FEROMAN, very helpful and reassuring.

Hey, Buster, what are you doing over at this field??? Get Back; Get Back to where you once belonged! :p

Air Bee
 

Anyone know why Air Bee came in to Stansted today around 15:30 and went to Sat 1? Looking at their website they only do internal flights.:confused:

Charter probably. They had one at HUY the other week and I think have some regular weekly flights to some UK airports this summer

Ground Handling?
 

Flew into STN today from PIK. Flight FR 416 bang on time, flight time 55 mins. Parked as close to main terminal as is possible so how come it took 40 minutes to have the luggage delivered to the baggage reclaim. Must be all of 200 yards?

FR416 STA= 1130
ATA= 1104

So I guess because you landed early the agent due to unload your baggage from the Aircraft would be still dealing with another Aircraft.

Thought that might be a factor although STN was the quietest I have ever seen it. Anyway at least I got my bag back. BA lost it last time I flew with them!

This is a unique feature of UK airport handlers.

Elsewhere in the world scheduled arrival times, as in the UK, are approximations. You can arrive early or late (sometimes very late). Despite this, in my experience when arriving at overseas airports a gate is always available and a handling crew standing there on the ramp ready and waiting.

It is a unique UK feature that nobody seems prepared to look at the actual anticipated arrival time or to organise themselves to handle the aircraft when it arrives. Nobody seems to understand the STA is an estimate rather than a fixed time. If the incoming flight is 5 minutes early some stations seem determined to sit around drinking tea so the bl00dy passengers don't get one minute of advantage from the early arrival. Life would be SO much easier without passengers.

Before anyone starts having a go at this, please explain how overseas, including LCC handlers, they can manage this all so much better.

..of course an airport would be much easier to operate...................
 

...if it wasn't for those pesky passengers! LOL.
But some airports in the UK, and certainly Stansted, are regulated for runway slots. So this means airlines do generally have to operate on time or they can get penalised up to £20,000 by the co-ordinator - see link :8 http://80.168.119.219/UserFiles/File...ode%202007.pdf
So there's an air of expectation of the handlers for an on-time operation and they plan their resources around this. Many foreign airports only have the odd Ryanair flight a day so they're champing at the bit for something to do and love it when it arrives early. Still doesn't explain your luggage really and if you actually waited 40 mins after you got in the baggage hall then that's far too long of course. I'd say 15 to 30 mins after parking is about normal.

Published airport schedules are on/off stand times and not landing take-off/times. So for the STA1130 a landing time of 1120-25 is on schedule. If the ATA of 1104 was the landing time then the flight was 15-20 mins early.

Handlers often work in teams being allocated flights where flight timings allow them to move from one aircraft to the next. So it's possible the early landing meant the team were still busy handling another flight.

Stand availability can be a problem at peak times when arriving aircraft land early on the schedule as often the allocated stand is still occupied by an aircraft not yet departed. this creates ground congestion problems for ATC and the allocators often having to park the aircraft somewhere else then this messes up the aircraft handling plan.

So while landing early may be nice for the passengers and crew it can often seriously affect others on the ground.

Sorry guys this just does not cut it. Example :

BA Heathrow to St Petersburg, Russia, a couple of months ago. Arrives early due to good tailwind. No BA staff, they use a handling agent. Airport where they have had no investment in ground equipment etc for years (example, Follow Me ramp vehicle is still an old Lada, but they are always waiting for you). Huge blizzard in progress, active snowploughing of both ramp and taxiways is going on, Lada leads us by alternative taxi route. Straight to gate, everybody standing round (yes, in the snow, big coats, hats and gloves on) and ready, ALL ramp equipment on hand. Same going on at adjacent gates as well, it was quite busy. Bags and pax all start unloading in a minute, fuel truck positioning, etc. bags on belt inside terminal in 10-15 minutes, before most are even through immigration. Terminal from the 1950s but everything neat and clean.

BA St Petersburg to Heathrow a few days later, lands somewhat ahead of time, nice CAVOK day, gets held up taxiing to gate but approaches there pretty much to the minute. Holds for 10 minutes as nobody on stand. Eventually taxies in, another 15 minutes to get the door open. Five staff, all the wheelchair team etc, all in the jetway and had been hanging round for an age but nobody qualified on the jetway itself. Walk down through terminal where, as ever, all the ceiling tiles have been ripped out yet again to expose he wiring - and just left with nobody working. Wait at belt over 45 minutes for first bags. Very few bags coming through anywhere in the hall at all, it was quite quiet.

You see, read that quote at the start again. It's the attitude that is key, not what resources you have or have not got.

Does anyone know how the new ATH A3 service is doing? I thought twice daily 321 was a bit overkill, but is it holding up?

Regards

Mike

Aegean. Going for a month now and had both full and near empty loads, but generally just under half full on average which I guess they will be happy with.

Is the Charter schedule for this winter at STN going to be seriously depleted?

With Ryanair grounding 20 aircraft there too, numbers could continue to fall.

The merged FCA/TOM operation will have 2 based aircraft next summer, up from just 1 this summer

This thread seems to have gone quiet, so I'll try to get it re-started. Let's see.......mmmm...
Ah, yes! Does anyone know what's going to happen to mid- and long-stay parking? Apparently, meteor will no longer be operating these car parks. Is BAA bringing them in-house? Heard a rumour that mid-stay will be rebranded as a kind of "Long Stay Express", with bus stops for departing passengers being replaced by a fleet of small minibuses roving the open zones and picking up customers from where they are parked. Is there any truth to these speculations?

does anyone know of any long haul flights that might start soon. wasnt air asia x going to start flights into stansted and what about an airline starting routs that were lost by maxjet , eos and american surly there is a market for it as i heard that the flights to the US where always quite full. and what about ryanair doing long haul , if they do, when would they lickly to be started