PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Airlines, Airports & Routes (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes-85/)
-   -   STANSTED - 2 (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/245928-stansted-2-a.html)

STN Ramp Rat 16th Nov 2010 15:03

Air Berlin HAJ and NUE to LGW from Feb 11
already being discussed in the wrong forum ....... but now formally announced. it seems to be death by a thousand cuts...... very sad for STN

Gatwick Airport

jdcg 16th Nov 2010 16:18

On other forums everyone seems to be assuming that the other AB ops will switch to LGW asap, slots permitting. Is this the case? All the other ops (Dusseldorf, Munster & paderborn) are Q400 ops which may seem a bit of a waste or just unprofitable into LGW. Besides Dusseldorf would be up against EZY and Flybe so not much chance of making any money there. I can't see that AB would gain anything from a further shift south - any OW connections would just detract from direct flights from their DUS base surely?? If anything a move to LCY would make more sense

Aero Mad 16th Nov 2010 16:50

Except charges at LCY are as far as I know rather too much to make decent profits.

Hounddog1 16th Nov 2010 17:36

Remember Air Berlin joined One World alliance recently and the waves of flights will tie up with BA's flights from LGW on its long-haul programme, so its not all about costs at LGW, there is a bigger factor/picture to look at here.

Xcircustiger 18th Nov 2010 17:09

2 too many !!!
..agreed now on the correct forum...
The over-riding issue at STN is there are still too many handling agents...
Going back less that 18 months, there were 4 which has partially been addressed
with the Servisair absorption of Aviance. On the pax/ramp side there is only
enough work for 2, each with one of the major low cost carriers. The rest of
the work doesn't add up to much and could easily be absorbed.

Barnaby the Bear 18th Nov 2010 18:25

Enjoyed using the service to NUE from STN. It was easy to get to avoiding the M25 and the dartford crossing. :hmm:

stuinn 22nd Nov 2010 10:16

Air Asia X
Air Asia just announced 4 x weekly flights to Paris from Feb 14 2011 using A340. Does this mean a reduction in the service at Stansted?

Xcircustiger 22nd Nov 2010 11:37

..doubt it ..they open and shut bases like they're going out of fashion
trying to make different things work....so I reckon they can run both
with the 2 x A340 ( is there a 3rd due ???)
Interesting to note that a lot of the passengers on the STN route fly
in from Europe so possibly the peak time increase to 9 a week will cease...

Stanstedeye 2nd Dec 2010 19:24

todays diverts
There were 3 TCX 330's diverted into STN today

ericlday 2nd Dec 2010 19:46

TCX 330's doing LGW outbound flights. Positioned in from MAN.

pamann 2nd Dec 2010 20:34

Just noticed DY and even LG back on the departure/arrival boards at STN. Maybe some of these airlines shouldn't have been so quick to do a runner from the airport.

With TCX operating some of the LGW flights from here today, is it not about time some of the charter operators reviewed their London operations and not put all their eggs in one basket being Gatwick? I'm not saying move their operations to STN, but when you have multiple aircraft at Gatwick and just one aircraft at STN surely it would make more sense to move one or two more aircraft over to STN on a more permanent basis?

Airlift21 2nd Dec 2010 23:55

A bit of snow wont persuade airlines to go back to Stansted I'm afraid. Nor would it persuade airlines to split operations as much as you said. Anyway, I thought that Essex generally gets more snow than Sussex and Surrey in an average winter?

Hounddog1 3rd Dec 2010 05:03

I believe there was a Cubana IL96 there aswell that diverted from Gatwick and Air Zimbabwe 767 from Harare.

Stansted is a useful diversionary airport, especially for LCY flights as it is just up M11.

Airport managers need to realise Global Warming and the change of weather patterns that the UK gets, bearing in mind it was on Jan this year that we experienced this kind of bad weather before. Its time to study how the scandinavian countries cope each year. Snow equipment is expensive for the amount of time it is in use, but it is a needed tool that all airports must have, the debacle of LGW and in the past LTN has to be overcome, but like everything else, you still have to get humans to drive these pieces of kit and they too have to get into work. Roll on robotic snow ploughs!!

If you cas you mind back to early this year, there were aircraft stuck at STN after diverting from LGW for a day or so, that was due to handling agent running out of de-icing fluid, so that added to the airlines woes, who already had aircraft out of position. Perhaps this time round they stocked up before hand !!

STN Ramp Rat 3rd Dec 2010 08:02


one swallow does not make a summer, before Catagory 3 ILS lots of aircraft used to divert to Prestwick from London but they would never consider a Prestwick service. the sad fact of the matter is that the Gatwick commands a higher revenue that Stansted. There are more people in the Gatwick Catchment area than Stansted.

Airlift21 3rd Dec 2010 18:21

Just out of interest, how many airlines actually use Stansted?

pamann 3rd Dec 2010 20:50

About 18 on a regular or semi-regular basis (both scheduled and charter).

British Airways is operating flights next summer on behalf of Thomas Cook to both Palma and Edfinha (Tunisia) on Saturday/Sunday respectively. :ok:

I still think that another aircraft from Thomas Cook to match Thomson's two based aircraft in the summer would be onto a winner. Having worked for a travel agency in London many moons ago there was and I'm sure still is the demand there. But what do I know. :confused:

TOWTEAMBASE 3rd Dec 2010 21:05


If your refering to the BA 744 and 777 x2, they were ex LHR, it wasnt the handling agent running out of fluid,it was the fact that the glycol couldnt be produced fast enough, and it involved all companies that deiced, not just one handing agent

Hounddog1 4th Dec 2010 05:43


It was reported from a manager within a certain handling company that they only had 800 litres of de-icer left, enough to do their YK flts that day. Having got diverted traffic from LGW/LHR into STN it provided a problem in dealing with the demands from these airlines.

Other handling companies would not do "secondry work" as they were contracted to their own particular airlines, which was a fair point, but not when you are getting it in the neck from .

There was a Cargo 747 that was encrusted in frost as there was no de-icing fluid available. it was not until the management team at BA in LHR diverted a truck or two to STN that was coming down from Glycol in Newcastle going to Heathrow got involved, that new fliuid was available. It is true that Glycol could not produce fast enough and the handling agent were looking elsewhere, eg:France, but that was a non-runner, due many factors, including the density of the mixture and the type of nozzles used to squirt fluid, as some de-icer is much thicker than other, sounds stupid but its true.

It does not matter where the planes diverted from, but the factor there was very low/no de-icer available, there was TCX planes involved in this and they were not based aircraft, and diverted aircraft were literally stuck at STN unable to return to their main bases, as the weather was severe overnight and each night on the ground added more frost to the aircraft. Regarding the Cargo 747, due to demands from BA in LHR, two rigs were sent to de-ice the aircraft, and one of them ran out of de-icer and had to go and re-fill adding more time, and as we know de-icing an aircraft needs to be done shortly prior to departure this again caused issues ,

Finally, Cargolux wanted to divert aircraft from MSE due icy runway/conditions, but elected not to come to STN as there was not enough de-icer fluid to deal with their aircraft.

Point being, there initially was not enough de-icing fluid to deal with own aircraft, let alone anything that diverted in, and as we all know de-icing is a damn good money spinner.

STN Ramp Rat 4th Dec 2010 06:57

Hounddog1 sums it up correctly, Kilfrost simply could not produce the stuff fast enough and they provide a majority of the fluid for the UK. you cannot mix fluid types in the same rig and changing fluid type requires the rig to be decontaminated from the old fluid amngst other things. this was a UK problem not an airport or handler problem. I should imagine Kilfrost are working overtime at the moment with the forecast of frost to the new year.

STN Ramp Rat 6th Dec 2010 13:31

Sun Country off to Gatwick now
It seems that Sun COuntyr are offering a much larger program for next summer but out of Gatwock not Stansted. what is/can the BAA do to stop the rot?
I can't believe that there is no catchment area for anyone other than Ryanair and Easyjet

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:24.

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.