PIA relocation to LBA
 

In a word....No! There is some evidence that PIA were considering an increase in frequency on their ops from LBA this winter, however nothing materialised. However there is no chance of them leaving MAN as to do so would be to forget the whole band of Pakistani origined communities in Lancashire etc. Likewise all the points re MAN operational capabilities for the 777 are valid; however for the A310, LBA is just about right, but don't mention LVPs!

Update please!
 

Flying ams-man on 1 January and man-anu 2 January, staying overnight at the Radisson Sas what is the best way to get to T3 as I understand that the skylink is gone.

Any info would be welcome, thanks in advance,
Simplestuff

Walk from the Radisson in the Skylink to "The Station" Train & Bus station, go down to the groundfloor & exit at the front of the station,there is an MA bus that will take you directly to T3. It only runs every 15 minutes though.

Thanks Mr A Tis it is much appreciated.

Simplestuff

Thanks, EGGC, for the update. I seem to recall that there used to be some PIA flights to Canada refuelling at Manchester as well up to a few years ago - they must fly non-stop now from Pakistan if those flights are still around?

Otherwise, two 777-200 and two 777-300 flights from Karachi to JFK. What do you think - will those flights continue to be safe or could PIA be persuaded to send a 777-200 to Dublin first and clear US Immigration?

I'd still prefer the Air Blue A321 coming to Cork from Pakistan and doing that refuelling in Turkey!

Don't forget PIA left SNN for MAN

Is there an airside transfer facility in terminal 2? Apart from the airbridge gates how many other gates are there in T2 ie bus gates?

Yes manchester has a transfer facility in T2, Gates from 202-215 are bridged, gate 201 has no bridge. Busing gates: there are 4 and are labled as gate 300A,B,C+D.

BA to reduce MAN -LGW services
 

From UK Airport News

BA is reducing daily domestic services from Gatwick - Manchester from seven to five for Summer 2009. They are also reducing LGW -Edinburgh from six to four and LGW -Glasgow from five to four.

Suzeman

i feel the demise of so many manchester based flights,ie BA's MAN-JFK,BMI relocating it's longhaul routes to heathrow.perhaps now is the time to re-launch manchester airport.as the competition seems to be liverpools john lennon airport,with no frills operations the main source of revenue.how about manchester's "noel gallagher" international airport.the infrequent flight announcements could be made in a real "mancy" accent over the tannoy.possibly a bronze statue of the oasis singer could be positioned in the check-in area of terminal 1 ?....any suggestions.

Stop all this nonsence about the re-branding and relaunch of Manchester with all this talk of minor celebs.

Everyone knows that if the airport does re-launch it would be called 'Frank Sidebottom - Timperley International'. All retail outlets would be closed to free up room in the terminals apart from one shop 'Mr Lakes Sky-Lard Emporuim'.

Steve

If it’s going to be re-named why not go all the way! Was briefly toying with the idea of David Beckham regional hub but I just thought this was too 1990s so I have decided on the obvious choice:

"Jack and Vera Duckworth mega national hyper market (with 2 runways)".

A shrine to all Corrie actors past and present could be set-up in the airport, the passing trade from flocking fans alone would keep the airport going!

We could even re-name all the SID's/STAR's. The Deirdre Rachid 1A would be a particular favourite of mine!!!

Beckham Intl
 

Would landing aircraft have to carry out a DME Arc approach, thus they too could "Bend It Like Beckham".

You could buy all your perfume & fashion at the Vicky B Duty-Free.

Oh, plus an hourly shuttle to LA...& (at the mo) Milan.

:ooh:

Well done Suzeman for posting some news :D

Even a 50/50 rumour would be appreciated on this "rumour network" but all this msn/facebook type chat is mind numbing.

Though most of your post was unhelpful, bermudatriangle, I think you may be on to something. There is a reason BA/BMI can't make as much money outside London and that reason is that they are too expensive for most economy passengers and need to be cross-subsidised on Long Haul by business fares. It says something of BA and BMI's operating structure if they are too incompetent to turn a profit outside of the world's largest business centre (and please nobody bring up the fact that Heathrow is a hub, these two airlines are extremely dependent on London based passengers).

The fact is that Jet2 and FlyBE can make a profit at Manchester because they offer what the public wants whereas BA/BMI are old airlines that offer the public what they "should" want. That mentality is now dead in Europe and it is why BA struggle to cope outside of their comfort zone. As a non-British person I have no pride in Manchester although it is a lovely city where I attend many meetings so this post is nothing to do with a pro-MAN bias.

To sum up what I am saying: yes BA/BMI pulled MAN because they couldn't make money but that isn't a fault with MAN and its passenger base, it's a fault with BA/BMI.

Low-cost is the future in Europe, why can't people embrace it as a fantastic commercial opportunity? Why whine for the legacy carriers to return when Low cost can do the job? Even on long haul a relatively low cost model could work if it was done right (i.e not Zoom).

I can give you 2 50/50 rumours from within the walls of Olympic House...Mexicana and Royal Brunei.

We shall see....

Royal brunei have expressed interest in MAN on a 4x weekly basis, but have no aircraft at the moment.
Mexicana, id say no. They have only just announced London and I doubt there would be a demand for MAN-MEX markets

Who said anything about MAN-MEX....there are certainly two more profitable destinations in Mexico...CUN/ACA for example.

Neither of which are Mexicana international bases

That's more like it :ok:

What's the latest on the Air China Beijing service, scheduled to start "March 09". I know the whole financial world has changed, since the announcement of the CAAC expansion plans on 11/09/07, but are we still on their radar?

Any official news on the ex BA hangar at MAN, there were 2 Monarch airbuses in it last night, have they taken it on ?

MAN777 wrote....

Any official news on the ex BA hangar at MAN, there were 2 Monarch airbuses in it last night, have they taken it on ?

The (Ex) BA Hangar is owned by Manchester Airport, hangar space is rented out to anyone wanting to use it.
The 2 Monarch a/c in there at present are 757's G-MONB and G-MONE which are leaving the fleet and are in there while they undergo Return Off Lease checks and work.

Cheers, bigMAN

Whoops, must practice my aircraft identification skills !!:O

I second betablocker's question re: Air China. Surely their plans are on hold I don't expect them to come to Manchester in March?

I sure as HELL don't want to be flying on business low cost. I don't mind using them out of my own pocket but for frequent fliers who do a shed load of miles, they really need a genuine legacy offering. If the firm is sending me Ryanair I'm job hunting...... The future in Europe outside the South East IS low cost but the recent BA / BMI reductions were long haul and the legacy carriers remain serving their off shore hubs. They are the BAs and BMIs of the US etc.

If your argument held up, there would be a genuine low cost long haul replacement in the wings to take up the slack.

Sorry for being mind numbing betablocker, we were just trying to lighten the mood!!

Sorry to use valuable server space!!! Will let you get back to the oh so serious business of discussing rumours!

Well Skipness given the current climate I would suggest you dust off the old CV. I work for a major multinational and have been told IF I have to travel to keep costs as low as possible including using budget airlines.

We had a directive a while back telling us to use LH instead of BA for international travel because we can get better deals via Munich rather than Heathrow, not tried it (yet) but I guess there goes my BA Exec card!!!

Rob

Certainly Skipness I'm not disagreeing with what you said, all I'm saying is that there is little opportunity outside of the South East for legacy carriers, I wasn't suggesting that Long Haul Locos would be an obvious success. What I was trying to get at was: why are some people at Manchester and other areas complaining about losing traditional carriers when clearly those are not what the market desire, the airport makes money out of Low cost flights doesn't it? Don't they pay the same fees?

I do firmly believe though that if it was run well a low fares long haul airline could work in the right economic climate so long as it didn't compromise too much on service. Regular business travellers are not stupid, they won't refuse to use an airline just because it has been labelled "low cost" by industry critics (as long as a good level of service is maintained by the airline in question). Just look at Jet2, there are many companies in Yorkshire with which I have had dealings that have no problem using Jet2 for business travel needs short haul.

Never scheduled for March 09. Possible earliest date is Sept 09.

No.......not always (!) Indeed some pay no fees at all. The market does support legacy long haul but struggles on British registered legacy short haul. Though last time I looked MAN still have Air France, Lufthansa, KLM, CSA etc etc.

The whole point though is that AF, KL, LH, CZ etc.... are all serving their main hubs from MAN.... as is BA and to a lesser extent bmi. A British registered legacy carrier operating short haul flights ex MAN would be relying mainly on point to point traffic, up against non British legacy carriers having the advantage of operating to their hubs.

But the problem as I see it is having to transit through LHR which even at the best of times can be chellenging. As well as long haul I use the shuttles pretty often and if I can avoid LHR and go through LGW.

I like flying BA having never had a problem with them (other than being late) but flatly refuse to have the heathrow experience again. even T5 is no better.

People seem to be misunderstanding what I am saying. Of course I understand that Air France, Continental etc are operating via their hubs. My point over the last few posts has been that with the fares those airlines are charging hub operations are the only way forward.

Any destination (within reason) would work if it was cheap enough hence my belief that Low cost carriers are the future for Manchester.

Airlines like Virgin are the airlines for MAN.

Get 20 787/A350s and you are flying! Literally!

The source most people are getting this from clearly states March 09 Bloomberg.com: Canada

That is about the only one I can find.

"Ian Curtis International Airport"

That's very subjective. Most people I know find T5 an absolute dream compared to the other terminals at LHR. The transfer experience versus a place like CDG is also much better.

Also in terms of being late, BA have vastly improved their punctuality levels since the move to T5. Baggage performance in terms of lost bags/1000 pax is better now than AF or KL.

Well, is that a criticism of BA/BMI or not? Certainly in the case of BA, trying to function as a legacy carrier and a loco at the same time is not going to work - they have a very strong position at LHR and will continue to make most of their money out of premium travel. Even in this economic climate there is a clear argument that BA are better protected focused around LHR than a low cost airline operating from the regions - at least they are posting a profit, compared to the likes of FR etc who are expecting to make losses.

You are absolutely right that the future for point to point services at MAN is low cost, as it is with most of the UK regions. Hence you won't see BA taking much part in it. But that shouldn't be a criticism of BA, they just operate a different business model.

I wouldn't bet on it. By the time these aircraft are rolling into LHR they may just have three runways to play with.... Virgin Atlantic's presence outside Heathrow does look restricted to leisure routes. I guess they might try LAS or similar but they have a MASSIVE investment in gaining and retaining premium traffic. Look at the money going into facilities at Terminal 3 Heathrow. Last time I looked they were even refusing to pay for airbridges at Manchester. Don't set yourself up for a fall hoping for a based fleet serving New York / Los Angeles etc.

You know where that amount of capital expenditure is going to start paying its way and realistically it's NOT Manchester.

I wouldn't bet on it. By the time these aircraft are rolling into LHR they may just have three runways to play with....

There wont be a 3rd Runway @ LHR, it will for sure be shelved.