|
It's not just this month, it's tomorrow. 2 memorial services being held at the airport.
|
So still only 1 airbridge installed but on the ground at stand 12. With under 2 weeks to go when is this going to be finished?
Also, was wonderning, can A380 use 23L/05R? I know the times it's in 23R/05L is in use only, but incase it needed to can it use R2? |
The second jetbridge is up and having its final install tweaks. also, the a380 can use both runways and the turning circle at the end of 23l
|
So it seems that everything is 'in hand' with regard to the A380's
arrival.....the doom mongers can now await the 'absolute chaos' predicted for the daily arrival of the behemoth! Bring it on.....MM |
Spent the weekend being a geek at Manchester and noticed that the 23R ILS appears to be out of order with aircraft doing VOR DME approaches, any particular reason?
On another note, NATS have put new MAN charts online including one showing areas cleared for A380 ground movements http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2010-07-29.pdf |
is the end of 23L classed as a turning circle, or just a taxiway that happens to go back on itself. from what i see, a turning circles mid 23L is B767 MAX & Juliet turning circle on 23R is B747 max.
However, as usual, i stand to be corrected. |
is the end of 23L classed as a turning circle, or just a taxiway that happens to go back on itself
The charts seem to class it as the latter, I think its just commonly known as a turning circle due to its primary use (to enable a backtrack along the runway) So it seems that everything is 'in hand' with regard to the A380's arrival.....the doom mongers can now await the 'absolute chaos' predicted for the daily arrival of the behemoth! Yep it seems MAN is going to prove the nay-sayers wrong (I for one was a sort of nay sayer, as it seemed to take an age for those jetbridges to arrive). I believe Emirates set down a deadline for stand 12, and formed a 'no A380 until stand 12 is ready' ultimatum (which is understandable for the F/J class pax). Anyway, now the stand is ready, I suppose its time for the doom-mongers to start on something else, like the 'baggage belts will fail with the pressure' or 'immigration/customs cant cope' kind of stories. I for one am going to be quite proud that my local, regional airport is going to host the A380 on regular flights. Also, there have been many arguements that F class wont work at MAN, well, we now have 2 carriers offering F, with EY looking at joining the club. Everone else at MAN should be proud too. I mean, for a regional airport with a medium sized city, we have a quite enviable offering of services: -A daily A380 service, which even an airport the size of AMS/MIA/ORD/MUC etc hasnt even got yet -CX to start using the B747-8 next year, making MAN the only UK airport to see the A380 AND the B747-8 on regular services (yes LHR has A380's, but not B747-8, likewise STN will see the B747-8 but not the A380) -We are one of a few European airports that can support the 3 big middle east carriers (EY/QR/EK), whereas others can only cope with 1 or 2 -up to 5 New york services a day (CO/DL/AA/PK), whereas most other UK airports and even Euro airports can only manage 2-3 -Some good legacy carriers like AA/SQ/US and so on, with a good mix of loco and charter traffic to boot -the first UK based B787 will be at MAN with TOM So come on, yes, MAN has had better days (with QF/CX/SAA and so on), but for the size of city MAN is compared to AMS/MAD/LON etc, we have a lot to be proud of! |
I was told that "runway 2" would be used for the A380. Not sure if this is correct. Also, a trip into MAN on Friday showed that the interior of B Pier still needs lots of work, if it is to be all new and shiny in 10 days' time - even if the airbridges are already on.
|
Ils / A380
23R ILS is fine and CAT 3. It has been off-line to facilitate the 300 hour burn-in of the 05L end, to meet its CAT 3 certification.
A380 can use either runway, CAA approval covers both. 05R is better for easterly arrivals, and 23L for westerly departures because it avoids the procedural constraints applying to Taxiway Juliet, and so you'll see the A380 using the southern runway even during the usual mid-day downtime. |
is the end of 23L classed as a turning circle, or just a taxiway that happens to go back on itself The charts seem to class it as the latter, I think its just commonly known as a turning circle due to its primary use (to enable a backtrack along the runway) Although it's often referred to as the "Whiskey-Yankee loop" .... try saying that on the R/T quickly ..... It's not normally called a turning circle ... that's used for the "midpoint turning circle" ..... this clarifies it from the second turning circle which used to be at the exit onto Twy Whiskey. The loop is also used to hold landing a/c before backtracking while the following a/c land .... this confuses many as out of three landing a/c it'll often be the third one which arrives northside first ... the first two get held in the loop ... the last one uses the mid-point to turn. :} |
....for a regional airport with a medium sized city, we have a quite enviable offering of services:
Don't wish to be critical but its typical of the "Northern mentality" that we are happy with our lot ..! Manchester is a major European city, the constant reference to regional is so dispiriting especially when "the locals" believe it themselves..... the stereotype is then re emphasised by the M.E.N, look North West, Radio Manchester etc. Compared to the other airports mentioned, Manchester does indeed punch above its weight, BUT the comparison is floored.....the figure we should be looking at is GDP and that by and large is serviced by Heathrow instead of direct service to the North -West. The GDP of Manchester is one of the largest in Europe and for a variety of reasons, the services Manchester attracts, meets only a fraction of that demand ! |
MAN Regional??
Hi Bagso,
I'm a northerner and I now see MAN as a regional airport, there was a time I thought different. Manchester is not the capital city, shame (ish). Or the major hub airport in the country. It is a regional airport.:sad: It is always great to see new services, bigger aircraft etc, but we have to be realistic and thats another thing we are good at.:ok: E.F. |
So come on, yes, MAN has had better days (with QF/CX/SAA and so on), but for the size of city MAN is compared to AMS/MAD/LON etc, we have a lot to be proud of! Compare a multi stop service with QANTAS or Cathay to a one stop service with EK, QR or EY. These are MAN's best days, it amazes me that people just don't see it. Just because the legacy flag carriers have retreated into alliances doesn't mean the competitions is second rate, they're often better! Correct me if I'm wrong but Eithad are using high Y low C B77Ws at the moment, the sort they used to use at Gatwick. F class was introduced on the back of the Singapore stop at Munich and I don't think it adds a whole lot really as if you can afford to fly First it's silly to fly MAN-MUC-SIN-destination when you can lose at least one stop via LHR / AMS / FRA etc. Though parking an A380 at the end of a pier built for the BEA One-Eleven fleet where arrivals and departures are on the same level and at busy times has a pile of Thomas Cook and Jet2 punters, well nothing's going to go wrong there. If only you had a purpose built large capacity building that was designed for wide bodies...one that sits empty for much of the day. If only, if only..... Actually having seen the two airbridges in position, can someone confirm that one of them is upper deck capable and that they're not both going to be used on the lower deck? Anyway my weekend trip LHR-MAN threw up two queries for me. 1) Why does the Tower controller have to ask what SID all departing aircraft has been given by Clearance Delivery who presumably sits nearby? Surely this is on the screen in front of him or does MAN just have adouble check for sleepy pilots? 2) When did the taxiway layout at MAN become so complicated. I usually note my route in and out ( Yes I am unusual, we've established that) and I actually got lost even with the AIS chart on my lap. It made CDG look straightforward! |
Skipness,
The tower controller only asks aircraft heading South-East towards Honiley to confirm the SID allocation. There are two SIDs which finish at HON when 23L/R is in operation, the HON1R/Y and the LISTO1R/Y. LISTO SIDs are for aircraft with a MTOW of 35 tonnes or less plus 146s, ERJs, CRJs and some other small jet types. The LISTO SID consists of a left turn towards LISTO and does not feature the noise abatement turn to the West of Knutsford which is a feature of the HON1R/Y SIDs used by larger aircraft. Because both SIDs lead to HON, I believe there is some history of larger jet aircraft incorrectly flying the LISTO SID instead of the HON SID, which is why Tower now seek confirmation of which procedure you have been cleared to fly. I agree that the taxiway layout can be confusing, particularly at the base of Pier B where taxiways B,K,J and F all intersect - there is also a disparity between the airfield signage and the Jeppesen charts in this area which can cause further confusion. |
The request to repeat the clearance is to confirm that pilots have got it right as a number set off using the wrong routeing and cause a possible conflict mainly on southern routes, I sure some of you guys at the front end can explain better than I have
I don`t class MAN as a regional airport as it has a considerable long haul presence and the way things are looking are going to expand againhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...s/embarass.gif Once one airline offers F class on long haul they will all follow suit as they cannot afford to loose those clients to another airline, afterall 3 or 4 F class make a very large differnce to whether a route is profit or loss making route Ian B |
Why do you say this?
Compare a multi stop service with QANTAS or Cathay I was mearly commenting on the days we had these carriers serving MAN, not on the number of stops involved. it's silly to fly MAN-MUC-SIN-destination when you can lose at least one stop via LHR / AMS / FRA yes people can transit one stop, but LHR, I know many people who refuse to fly through LHR now. No point asking why as they are the fare paying passenger and its their preference. Also, some people may want F for the entire journey, and LHR for example, only offers Y on its domestics. If only you had a purpose built large capacity building that was designed for wide bodies...one that sits empty for much of the day If you are referring to T2, then pier B was chosen due to the fact the A380 can turn off the runway and taxi into stand quickly and easily without circumnavigating the entire airport. Actually having seen the two airbridges in position, can someone confirm that one of them is upper deck capable and that they're not both going to be used on the lower deck? Yes one is upper deck and one is lower deck. The jetbridges are not fully installed yet and need the electircs fitted, which is why it gives the impression that they are both lower deck. Don't wish to be critical but its typical of the "Northern mentality" that we are happy with our lot ..! MAN IS a regional airport. It is not the capital so is a regional. We may be a major city, but small compared to some. Also, considering LHR is quickly reached by plane and train, its amazing to sercure the services we have. I know JFK has seen the EK A388 before, but to think we secured the EK A380 before JFK got it back, and before HKG and some of the other large airports, Im sorry but thats a major coup! So lets stop this moaning and enjoy the posatives of our airport!!!! |
Once one airline offers F class on long haul they will all follow suit as they cannot afford to loose those clients to another airline, afterall 3 or 4 F class make a very large differnce to whether a route is profit or loss making route Impressed that they're turning a B777-300ER in 1 hour 20 mins though. Apologies if this has been posted but do passengers need to get off at Munich both ways? |
No this is going the wrong way as the number of people doing this is quite tiny in proportion
Well, with only 8 F seats, of course the numbers are going to be tiny. Even if just 4 people get on in MAN, then thats a 50/50 split between MAN-MUC. Impressed that they're turning a B777-300ER in 1 hour 20 mins though. Apologies if this has been posted but do passengers need to get off at Munich both ways? Yes pax do have to get off at MUC. In terms of the turn around, another feat MAN will have is turning an A380 round with only an extra 5 mins to spare over the current B773 |
Management Changes
I see it has been announced that MAN has appointed its next MD, giving the job to Commercial Director Andrew Harrison, and creating a new role of COO with Penny Coates (whol I believe is currently MD for the smaller airports in the MAG portfolio).
If this is the case, whats the thoughts? Good appointments? Internal (but with external CEO starting) so maybe they provide good continuity? |
MAG Management Changes
See below for the MEN story a couple of weeks ago.
Seems to be a good idea with a new man at the top but experienced internal people on the next tier down. Penny set to take MAG to new highs - Manchester Evening News |
Link to NATS doesn't work, saying object not found. Is the link correct?
Have MAN said anything about replacing Pier B in the future? Also, next time I fly from T1 at MAN, will I be able to walk down Pier B and have a nosey at Gate 12? So Gate 12 is the waiting area at the end of Pier B and the pre-boarding area is the extension? |
The chart has been moved from the previous location, Try this one;
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/pamsl..._2_EGCC_2-3_en |
Cheers bjones4, that worked that time.
|
What was the AN-124 doing at MAN over the weekend?
Loaded in or out? What was it carrying? From where and to where? Any answers would be gratefully received. |
Your tag suggests you should know ;)
1) Out, struggled to climb. But excellent to see pronounced vapour trails and pressure cloud above wing. 2) Something heavy.... 3) In from India, out to Azerbaijan |
... to think we secured the EK A380 before JFK got it back, and before HKG and some of the other large airports, Im sorry but thats a major coup!
That's because Emirates (and indeed Etihad and Qatar) have recognised the massive amount of trade they can shift back and forth from the North West through their hubs to destinations not currently served direct from Manchester..... the A380 along with increased frequency is "hopefully" a long term statement of intent in this regard ! True AMS /MUC don't have the A380 BUT Munich does not need them, it already has direct service, (sometimes double daily), to places like Tokyo, Bangkok, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, Delhi, Hong Kong, JoBurg, Mumbai ! Many airlines use their European hubs to connect to these cities but Emirates appears to be about to shift numbers on an "industrial scale". With regard to the A380 route comparisons, Amsterdam is clearly a different proposition, but it is worth exploring the Frankfurt/Munich model, Manchester does compare to MUC both economically and geographically, it is not dissimilar to the Heathrow/Manchester relationship. Unlike the UK however, the German Government and national airline set up a structure to support major intercontinental flights without "total" centralisation at one major hub, Frankfurt. In the UK and at Manchester especially, Emirates have recognised the void, long may it continue, but please lets not roll over happy with what is nothing more than a "sprinkling" of intercontinental direct flights ! The "regional" argument that diminishes Manchester is presumably based on comparing our route structure with places like Birmingham, Bristol and Newcastle ? but if this is the case it is a poor argument. These cities are indeed very much "regional", that is a part my complaint with the local media, they are inward looking. Within the EU, the US, and Asia, Manchester is very much a "major international city", Emirates have recognised this and indeed the demand, sadly its own citizens so often fail to see its wider international image and are happy to embrace the "eeeh by gum , whippet and cloth cap culture". (As an aside local media so often then reinforce this stereotypical image. The idiotic weatherman on Granada is a case in point !) The comparison put forward re Manchester should actually be with a major "International City" and indeed gateway and that is Munich ! I well understand the "commercial hub interests" that prevail at Heathrow but an underlying policy that pretty much sucks "total UK demand" into an airport already at Max capacity and constrained by numerous other factors is at some stage doomed to end in failure. The doom-mongers suggest losing traffic to CDG, AMS etc but I would be more than happy to see a fleet of Emirates A380 operating hourly Emirates flights Ex Manchester if that is the way forward , that said, new government could do worse than look at the German model ! |
Bagso, some good points in there.
Firstly, true MUC does have more direct routes, but MAN/LHR cant really be compared to FRA/MUC because of the distances involved. Yes, MAN and LON are 2 seperate cities with their won seperate catchments, but LHR/MAN are much much closer together than MUC/FRA. It is so easy to hop on a plane direct to LHR, or with the rail improvements, now the train can be done quickly also. With this, much of the MAN catchement can get on a direct intercontinental route with relative ease, and this will always be the issue. The only way I can see MAN getting a 'piece of the pie' so to speak is the new ruling that allows no more growth in the south. Whatever people may think of MAN, it is in the best postition to accept new traffic, due to the fact T2 can handle many more daytime and nighttime flights, good all round transport links, large scale maintence facilities, cargo terminal, 2 runways, 3 terminals to choose from and so on. Now, this regional arguement, I think this is where people get a little ahead of themselves. LON is the capital, Manchester is a region of the UK. Man is not the main UK airport so hence, is a regional airport. Even business thinks MAN is a regional: Emirates: Manchester will become the world's first regional airport to have a regular A380 service Man airport: Manchester airport is the busiest regional airport in the UK Awards: Best UK Regional Airport in the Globe Travel Awards These are taken from news sources, very easy to find on the interweb. MAN is a regional, and even if it grows to be the biggest in the UK, will always be a regional. Its nothing to be ashamed of, it doesnt mean we will be doomed to always wearing flat caps and owning whippets. |
Thanks for that Betablocker. I guess if I had some MAN or Antonov ops contacts, I wouldn't need to ask here.
I was told that it departed to a UK airport, which sounds unusual - especially if it was empty coming in. Thanks. |
Emirates
Is there any hint that 1/9/10 will bring an announcement of the third
daily service? The three class version for a yield point of view is great assuming there is plenty of take-up at full fare (rather than upgrades) but without a third daily service surely EK are running the risk of handing economy pax over to QR & EY? Are they hoping that the overspill will book bhx/ncl? If BHX gets two 442 seat 77W's (in reality it will be a mix of 427/428 and 442 no doubt) then there will be more capacity offered than at Manchester with its 517 and 364 seat offering. With Manchester now over 50000 a month pax and the maximum capacity around 54000 it does seem odd to risk pushing pax away although I understand it is the front end which makes or breaks a service or it this case, the upper deck! Pete |
Oltonpete
The 3rd daily is pencilled in for either March or May next year. EK has now got 2 problems now that the A380 is on the afternoon service: -There is actually 1 less economy seat on the A380 than the current B77W, so obviously no increase in capacity for Y pax -Cargo has taken a HUGE hit as the A388 isnt as capable of uplift as the B77W Emirates is taking a huge gamble in upping MAN's premium service, sacrificing Y and Cargo loads for F/J, so I hope it pays off for them (Ive heard so far, it has) The EK21/22 is pencilled for a 3 class B773 (not specifically for F uplift, but the fact it offers best cargo and Y increase compared to the A332), and last I heard was going to be a 0625a/0935d. A year ago or so, the main man for EK did a talk to the TAS memebers at MAN, saying that on introduction of the A380, Skycargo would start a 4 weekly service. As it was a while ago now, I genuinly dont know the status of that plan. |
Just a suggestion here that we don't get too hung up on the 'capital/regional' label. Many of the world's most successful airports are not capital city operations, eg. Chicago, Frankfurt, New York x 3, Sydney, Toronto, Atlanta, Milan, Zurich, Munich, Barcelona and many more.
What really counts is the business opportunity offered by the catchment area feeding a particular proposed route. The population density, the GDP of the region, ease of airport access, disproportionate ethnic demand for certain routes (eg. MAN-ISB). These are typical elements which airlines examine, not capital city status (although some capitals do offer an enhanced wow/glamour factor). Does anybody here expect Canberra, Bern, Ottawa, Cardiff (or even Washington DC) become global superhubs anytime soon? "Capital City" refers to the seat of political legislature and is just one factor in the attractiveness of an airport. Many capital cities are superhubs, of course. London being a case in point. Perhaps it is more important to be the home base of a major airline, as is the case with LHR (BA) capital city, and FRA (LH) provincial city. The "capital" factor is not the overriding one, although taking the case of London in particular as a 'global city', there are many iconic tourist haunts, big business HQ's etc. related to capital status which boost its attractiveness. But the region surrounding MAN is also relatively prosperous by global standards and has much to commend it to airline companies. But MAN's Achilles Heel is that it is not home-base to any major airline company. None of the major alliance groupings hub in any significant way at MAN. These are the true advantages which LHR, FRA, MUC, CDG etc hold over MAN. Note that two of those airports serve political seats of government and two do not. The "capital city/regional city" label is a sideshow distracting from the factors which actually drive airport success. MAN has many positive factors to commend it to the airlines. Unfortunately, being a major alliance hub is not one of them. That is why we will not match MUC's offerings in the foreseeable future. LH supports MUC as BA dismisses MAN. SHED. |
You should say Lufthansa supports MAN as BA dismisses MAN
Ian B |
Many of the world's most successful airports are not capital city operations (...) FRA, MUC (...) |
Shed, very true those aren't capital cities (though many are regional capitals within their countries) however with the notable exception of Frankfurt and Zurich the places you list all have a population in their metropolitan areas more than twice that of Manchester - in the case of New York (x 3?) nearly four times, another significant factor which airline route planners take in to account. They are also generally much further away from their nearest city 'competitors' and so have an even wider catchment area. By the time you throw in the fact that roughly 20% of the population live in the London metropolitan area the chances of securing a more extensive long haul network - or as you rightly point out a based long haul carrier - reduce even further. The advent of the B787 might help in the coming years but other regional airports may be hoping the same thing.
Changing subject, can anyone shed any light as to why the fire cover at MAN is only NOTAM'd as CAT 10 (i.e. sufficient to cover A380 ops) until late October? Surely it should be a permanent change - assuming the A380 operation isn't just seasonal? |
jpthomas72 / AndyH52,
I am not in disagreement with you. Many airports serve cities which have substantial populations, administer a region, or have historical claims to capital city status. As do the German examples listed by jpthomas. But still, they are not capital cities today. That is the point. Whether or not they are the seat of government today is incidental for the purpose of exploring their potential for profitable air services. "Capital City" is a concept best left to politicians and their cronies. "Prosperous Conurbation" is of far more interest to the economics of the airline industry. And Greater Manchester is a prosperous conurbation supported by other similar population centres nearby. So lets not get distracted by the capital / regional labels. Successful airports can be located in both capital and provincial locations. By the way, the New York x3 was not a reference to population size; I was alluding to its support of three major airports in JFK, LGA and EWR. I should have expressed that point more clearly. Ian Brooks, you are right to acknowledge LH's support for MAN. Unfortunately, they do not currently offer a hub-and-spoke operation at MAN in the way they are able to do at MUC. That is not a criticism of them; it is simply the reality of the marketplace at the present time. SHED. |
Surely the issue is not whether a city is a capital, a regional centre or whatever but its ability to provide both inbound or outbound passengers in sufficient numbers in all cabins to make a decent profit - Canbera is a capital but the magnet in that part of Australia is Sydney, similarly Madrid is a capital but other spanish cities do nearly as well (sun, sea and sand).
Surely the issue for Manchester is, for regional routes, Liverpool nearby, and, as has been said, no airline or alliance using it as a hub? In addition, the fast train to London must be becoming more and more of an issue. |
Well put, Clareview. My point exactly. SHED.
|
Emirates etc
Some very interesting and thought provoking comments re "shed" etc I must confess I thought the prospect of a third daily EK would be overkill BUT there is just a chance that EK might infact be the saviour of Manchester. The extra publicity that the A380 generates should theoretically be a really great platform for the airport to publicise and market long haul service via Dubai. Pity our new MD could not have been pitched in earlier to front this ! As I said previous if we cannot generate direct service I would gladly settle for an eventual hourly service to Dubai ! Pity they could not offer services to the US and Canada.....! Just out of curiosity would this growth diminish if EK joined Star Alliance or OneWorld ? Meanwhile maybe the term "Provincial Capital" could be used henceforth, somewhat "republican" but certainly sounds more 2010 than 1910 to me.....! |
I`m going to along to MAN next week to see the Emirates A380 come in
Manchester Airport should be very proud of this amazing achievement :ok: |
Saw quite a few 380's going about their business at LHR these last 2 days. Not exactly a miracle, just a big plane. MAN needs BA back, not EK.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:41. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.