From my last trip through STN there seemed to be lots of changes going on in the security area, including an automated 'tray' conveyor, but the queues seemed longer than before.
Anyone able to tell me what exactly is going on?
PS Can I also say that the staff were all pretty polite - have they all been on a PR course?

reduction in EZY flights at Stansted?
 

Stansted - the decline continues
 

According to an interview with Carolyn McCall, three aircraft will move from STN to SEN next March, along with about 150 crew.
Assuming three rotations per day at 80% load factor and no replacement services, this will result in a loss of about 800,000 passengers in a full year to Stansted.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the Luton services are also shuffled about. Don't just expect Stansted to be affected. Just look at what launching LGW-ATH resulted in the eventual loss of the LTN-ATH. All I'll say is watch this space.
One thing Stansted has over SEN as a major point (and LTN for that matter) is a decent sized runway that can and does handle large aircraft up to 747-800/A380 to far-flung places. Certainly no chance of EZY transferring any A320's or DLM, BJV, FUE etc...
Both airports it should also be noted have very different catchment areas, tho granted some do overlap.
As per norm the bottom price in the airfare wars will play it's game in 'Jo Po' deciding where they actually fly from.
Good luck to SEN & STN & EZY for the future!

These automatic tray conveyors, now turning up at security points at an airport near you, are just the latest high-cost (though not necessarily high-tech) bit of kit for the Security Budget Wasting Industry to get their teeth into. There's a budget of £x million for security, and there are salesmen from the manufacturers who are out there ensuring that as much of that as possible, along with their associated sales commisions, comes their way.

The fact that the result is slower passenger processing and longer queues is neither here nor there.

Easyjet
 

I would assume the SEN agreement would be similar to others where if the passenger numbers do not live up the expectations then EZY could cut and run....back to status quo, but time will tell.....

Stansted-2
 

I think I read in one of the (surprisingly numerous) articles that there was an 18 month break clause - might be wrong though. But that shouldn't be necessary. I'm sure SEN will be a success for EZY, and for other operators too. Stobart Air have a smart marketing strategy and the speed of transit through SEN's new rail station and terminal should be attractive. In addition to the obvious European passenger appeal SEN is located in an urban area of over a quarter of a million people. Mind you, they haven't extended the runway yet....

This is a price driven market, Southend will do well as long as it’s offered cheaper than other South Eastern airports. If the ticket price goes up above the LGW and STN prices passengers will move away again. The danger is that EZY cannot sustain the expansion at SEN or that Ryanair move some flights there and push EZY out. It’s been a long time since EZY was committed to Stansted they are all about Gatwick these days.

The problem STN has at the moment is that it has to be sold, This is stopping any good deals being offered to new Airlines, There are some very good slots for Transatlantic and Asian routes at Stansted and loads of check-in desks and gates available Stansted just needs to give unbeatable deals to any new Airline wishing to open new unserved routes. AirAsia is doing very well with very high loads many of their passenger take advantage of the low cost Airlines to discover Europe.

I still find it hard to understand why Satnsted does not have flights to -
Orlando, Las Vegas, New York, Toronto, Dubai I could go on and make a page long list but I wont, There are many 1000's of passengers north of the M25 who hate the fact that they have to risk the dreaded M25 to get to Gatwick or Heathrow for there flights.

Im sure most people who have to uses the M25 have a horror story of delays tail backs and even missed flights. I myself have had many heart racing moment trying to get to Gatwick and Heathrow the worst being a missed flight to MCO I left for what should have been a 1.5 hr drive door to door which ended up taking 5 hrs from Colchester Essex to Gatwick I gave myself three hours but even this was not enough I now stay in a Airport hotel when flying from LGW or LHR.

On another flight to SFO the flight was delayed 3 hrs due to over a 100 passengers and some crew being stuck on the M25, I know that traffic delays can happen anywhere but the M25 has to be the biggest carpark in the world.

The AB STN-DUS flights have not been included in the new codeshare with BA. Does this mean:

1. They're about to be pulled from STN either completely or moved to LCY but they haven't quite got the slots yet?

2. LON - DUS is the only city pairing that both BA and AB serve and both are profitable so neither wants to dilute that by offering a codeshare.

air berlin
 

if air berlin were to pull out of stn,maybe they could try their luck at sen

daz-

The fact that Stansted has to be sold is not the reason why airlines are not moving there, or starting operations there. It is in BAA's interests for STN to be as busy as possible to enhance its value.
No, the problem is much more fundamental than that. Stansted is not the airlines' first choice of London airport. In fact, it could be the fifth or sixth choice.
Heathrow would be first choice for many, but is slot restricted and very expensive.
Gatwick is now a competitor with capacity, but not cheap. It is closer to affluent catchment areas than STN.
London City is closest to the City and very close to an affluent client base but is slot restricted, expensive and closed part of Saturday/Sunday.
Luton is better connected, has a far larger catchment population, but is congested at certain times.
Southend and Manston are cheaper, but distant from the capital.

At present there is surplus capacity in the south-east of England due to the recession and reduction in air travel, and the least attractive airport is suffering a loss of business as a result. Things will improve for Stansted when the other main competitors fill up, and traffic needs somewhere to go.
Don't forget that most of Stansted's business gains in the '90s and noughties were due to cross-subsidy and the fact that more attractive airports were full.

I was talking more of the passengers point of view, I think having both of London's biggest Airport way south of London and on the bottom side of the M25 is just wrong. I dont care if it were STN or LTN but more longhaul flights are needed north of London, On a recent flight from LHR to LAX out of the few people I talked to there was a couple from Doncaster with two young children, A lady from Keswick in Cumbria and a family of 6 from Norwich they all hated the fact that they could not use an Airport North of London, All had drove to LHR and found it very stressfull.

So all I am saying is, If the few people I talked to,12 including me, All would have chosen to fly from an Airport North of London just how many people on that one flight traveled from north of London. The demand is there, Airlines are trying to save money so why not STN or LTN ?

Maybe the airlines perceive that there is insufficient demand in the all important First and Business classes.

Remember Silverjet, Maxjet and Eos all flew from airports North of London unsuccessfully.

What's wrong with airlines saving money? It's hard enough to make any. American Airlines recently operated STN-JFK and walked away. It's not just about demand from the women of Cumbria, it's about the wealthy and those filling business class up front that work on the M4 corridor. There is a critical mass at Heathrow that's impossible to replicate. Why else did CO walk away from EWR-BRS? They got more bang for their buck flying that little bit further to LHR.

So what you are saying is First and Business class passengers all come from South of London and that passengers from North of London dont really matter, What you didnt grasp is all the people I talked to were from North of London not that they were the only passengers from North of London.

AirAsia are doing very well on a daily service from Stansted and filling there flat beds so that tells you people do want a North London service, so much so that other major Airlines are planning rival Low cost services to try and get there lost passenger back.

As for NewYork, First and Business class passengers soon came to Stansted to use EOS and MAXJET and they would still be around if AA had not got worried and started flights from Stansted ONLY to kill the compertition off, Then pull the route as soon as they had done the job, Dont for one minute think AA came to Stansted for any other reason, the load factors on AA were very good and that was when there was MAX and EOS, So Three flight to NewYork from Stansted, AA kills two off so there was plenty of passengers to fill 2 daily AA flight to NewYork but what happened AA ran back to Heathrow.

I know it wont happen for a while But if Ryanair or another low cost Airline decide to start Transatlantic services the the big boys will have something to worry about
and they wont win the fight, people will use the lowcost Airlines even in business just like they are using AirAsia.

I didnt say there was a problem with Airlines wanting to save money ! I was saying if an Airline wanted to save money the should try a cheaper Airport than Heathrow.

Sensible Transatlantic won't work from Luton at present - the runway is too short.
Stansted is not easy to get to from Cumbria, and your Norwich family were probably the only Norwich residents flying to NYC that day! Also, Stansted has an unfortunate history of transatlantic failures - they must have failed for a reason.
Just look a little further north and you will have your answer - Birmingham and Manchester still have TA links, and both serve major business centres.
I expect that for the foreseeable future, no airports in the UK will join the TA club.

Stansted has an unfortunate history of transatlantic failures - they must have failed for a reason.


MAXJET and EOS were doing very well, even expanding at Stansted, American Airline were also doing well, As I said in my last post, American Airlines came to Stansted to STOP MAXJET and EOS because they were both taking business and first class passegers from the Heathrow market, That is the only reason American came to Stansted. If you think this was not the reason why whould American pull the route if it was doing well and would have done even better after it killed off MAXJET and EOS.

The fact remains that there is more than enough people who would like to use Stansted but the BIG BOYS wont let the new boys play, Well like I said, One day the very last part of aviation that has been left in the 1990's will change and it wont be the big boys who win. The change in the Longhaul market has already started and 2012 will be a very in interesting year.

Air Asia to LGW from September
 

Confirmed today Air Asia to LGW from September

Tranceaddict - Please expand on your knowledge of this!