Interestingly, SV198/199 were the original flight numbers that the service was showing.

GDS has just updated but continues to only show SV123/124 flights, so, will be interesting to see what happens.

GDS has just updated but continues to only show SV123/124 flights, so, will be interesting to see what happens.

Today's Airline Route update states the Saudia flights for the winter are remaining as SV123/124 and at 3 weekly, but operating on Tue/Thu/Sat instead of Tue/Thu/Sun. Also the Thu service will be on a 2-class 772 from 18Dec - 31Jan. This matches what Saudia's own website is now showing, so seems to be the most likely outcome.

Logahu,

Noticed this today perhaps might explain some slight Thurs changes to 2 class machines ?


Saudia has updated planned operational schedule for Jeddah – Manchester service on/after 26OCT14. The airline will continue to offer 3 weekly flights on board 3-class Boeing 777-200ER aircraft. However, from 18DEC14 to 31JAN15, Thursdays flight sees 2-class aircraft operating with no First Class service.

SV123 JED0430 – 0815MAN 77L 26
SV123 JED0430 – 0815MAN 772 4

SV124 MAN1200 – 2100JED 77L 26
SV124 MAN1200 – 2100JED 772 4



Nigel

MAN will need over 10% in 2015 to hit 25m pax
 

1991 10,463,682 1992 12,051,560 1993 13,099,080 1994 14,569,665 1995 14,750,928 1996 14,659,803 1997 15,946,986 1998 17,351,162 1999 17,577,773 2000 18,566,209 2001 19,307,011 2002 18,809,360 2003 19,699,256 2004 21,249,841 2005 22,402,856 2006 22,442,855 2007 22,112,625 2008 21,219,195 2009 18,724,889 2010 17,759,015 2011 18,881,788 2012 19,732,444 2013 20,751,581
2014 22,000,000 ?

EasyJet Fleet Allocation
 

I suspect that EasyJet's rate of expansion at MAN is heavily influenced by factors wholly unrelated to the performance of this airport. The lengthy dispute between EZY management and major shareholder Stelios (and family) resulted in a long delay in placing an order for new aircraft. Whilst an order is now in place, delivery dates are further out than might have originally been the case.

On top of this, EZY has understandably taken advantage of unanticipated opportunities to expand at its core bases. The chance to acquire a large block of scarce LGW slots from FlyBe … the chance to capitalise on Alitalia's troubles … EZY had to react to these. But the aircraft required to take advantage of these short-notice opportunities have to come from somewhere, and the delivery situation means that units must be sourced from existing bases.

So far, MAN has been fortunate that the base here has grown to eight units and no aircraft have been withdrawn and reallocated. EZY closed at EMA and has reduced its fleet at bases including NCL, LPL, BFS and STN. In most cases, the airport 'locals' despair that their airport appears to be doing badly. The reality is simply that those scarce aircraft must be deployed where they will generate maximum profit in the long-term. And that means that those 'use-it-or-lose-it' LGW slots must be quickly grabbed and occupied.

Against this backdrop, slower-than-anticipated expansion at MAN must not be viewed as some sort of local failure. Any additional aircraft availability will be allocated according to EZY's internal company priorities … MAN is on the list but (I guess) not at the top of it! Keep the fingers crossed that MAN can keep hold of its existing based fleet of eight EZY units. That is a good result at this point. Appreciate any additional expansion which does come our way in the short-term. Then look for further fleet expansion once new aircraft deliveries pick up (barring the effects of any merger and acquisition activity in the meantime).

On a similar note, RYR faces a comparable problem for very different reasons. The company endured a lengthy stand-off with Boeing when negotiating for additional B738's on terms acceptable to both parties. Again, an order is now in place but a delivery hiatus has resulted. This will affect the rate of expansion at bases across the company. Units will be transferred to where the company foresees the best profit opportunities going forward. Some airports will lose based aircraft ("But … but … they were always full!!!!") in favour of the company's identified priorities until deliveries pick up again.

Re EZY "slower-than-anticipated expansion at MAN must not be viewed as some sort of local failure".

Possibly not but it was only Nov that EZY said.....

"Manchester had been its best performing hub over the past financial year, with passenger numbers soaring 16 per cent to 3.4 million"

If that is the case and we really are "that good"....

it would surely be nice to "divert" some aircraft or at least more routes to our operation ........in tandem with the opportunities at Gatwick !

If anybody has a complete net rundown of new routes , increased frequencies and cutbacks since, then it would make interesting reading !

In other news the Daily Bugle today suggested that Manchester as a City is thee most name checked City in Westminster and before the snipers come out most comments appear to be positive:D

Manchester the most mentioned of any English city in Parliament - Manchester Evening News

However given the continuing ignorance expressed by "Visit Britain" to the UKs second most popular City for tourism, some moves here would dramatically effect Manchester throughput ....

AND the red tape that Egyptair "appear" to be mired in, maybe Manchester Airport could drop them an email !

This is just TWO interventions that WOULD make a difference ....alternatively we could just sit on our hands !

Why bother with any aircraft at all? Departed Manchester T2 yesterday and couldn't find the gates without walking through the extensive and intermidable shopping mall. MAG should be able to earn a pretty penny from these high end retail outlets (and no I'm not talking about WHSmith!).

I am sorry, but we have had this before, it is hardly a trial to walk through the shopping area into the departure lounge in T2. As for can't find the gates I am speechless.

I regularly use T2 and rarely if ever shop and it takes a couple of minutes to walk through.

Finally there are a long list of airports that use the same, walk through the duty free area to get to the gate style, Manchester is far from alone.

Even TFS has the same arrangement.

Please reconnect your voicebox!! Tongue strictly in cheek ... :ok:

This sort of thing is infuriating

Concern over rail shake-up for Lakes Line (From The Westmorland Gazette)

It follows on from similar reports about scrapping trains direct trains from Humberside.

Anybody following Manchester on twitter will no doubt have noticed the puerile games emanating from our illustrious twits.......

"Where is Di Maria"

Rather than playing silly games on twitter would the airport not be better using its energy to support campaigns of this nature ?

Not only do passengers come from these regions they do actually go in the other direction, there seems to be an obsession with passengers from Manchester flying OUT but total ignorance of those flying IN ...

A direct link from the airport to The Lake District one of thee best tourist attractions in Europe would seem seems absolutely vital to me ............

This sort of thing is infuriating

Concern over rail shake-up for Lakes Line (From The Westmorland Gazette)

It follows on from similar reports about scrapping direct trains from Humberside.

Anybody following Manchester Airport on twitter the last 36 hours will no doubt have noticed the puerile games emanating from our illustrious twitters or as I prefer to describe them "The Twits".

"Where is Di Maria"

Rather than just playing silly games on twitter would the airport not be better canvassing support from influential groups and focusing its energy to support campaigns of this nature ?

Campaigns that might actually put bums on seats (see above).

Not only do passengers come from these regions they do actually go in the other direction, there seems to be an obsession with passengers from Manchester (The City), flying OUT but total ignorance of those flying IN ...

A direct link from the airport to The Lake District one of thee best tourist attractions in Europe would seem absolutely vital to me ............AND one worth fighting for !

Sometimes they just seem clueless about issues relating to the airport !

Ps ...where are all those opinion makers re "OneNorth" and transport investment, the noise is deafening!

Bagso,

Im sorry that this is going to come across as rather blunt but.....

You are not happy with the way MAN are using social media to promote the 'right thing', we get it.

In the nicest way I can word it, would your frustrations and energy not be best focused on MAN itself, instead of an anonymous internet forum where your half page rants are unlikely to change anything?

Like I say, I am sorry to come across the way I do, its just you seem to be covering similar ground each time, with just a slight tweak on the actual subject matter, and with the best will in the world Bagso, you are preaching to the wrong people.

If you are so passionate about change, direct it at the right people and that change may have a better chance of that change happening.

(or, as seen as social media is such a sore point, why not fight fire with fire and use social media to promote services at MAN and pester MAN to re-tweet noteworthy news?)

NATS hold onto MAG Airports at MAN and STN after the recent loss of both LGW and BHX.

MAG and NATS announces ten year deal

Skip, thanks for that information and link. I was wondering when the MAN contract for air traffic services was due for renewal after the recent news from LGW and BHX. Those that listen to ATC will continue to hear some familiar voices.

LAX, I would be surprised if Bagso doesn't air his views to those more directly involved. Irrespective of the media aspect, there is a valid point about train services to the airport. Work on the 4th heavy rail platform at the station is advancing at a fair pace now and my understanding was that its purpose was to provide a more efficient operation of trains and to enable more services to the airport. While some of the extra trains would hopefully be to the south, I thought it would also lead to additional services to Piccadilly and beyond, given the work on the so called 'Hub' and the Ordsall curve (edit: should be 'Ordsall Chord') designed to give a better flow through Piccadilly. It seems strange therefore that at a time when improved connectivity to MAN is forecast, direct train services to Hull and the Lake District may be cut. Yes, passengers can change trains, but it's not much fun if you've lots of luggage and it can be a hassle for the elderly or disabled, plus the worry (as with airports) of missing connections especially if tickets are only valid for a specified train.

My own observations are that most trains (not always the local ones) are now well used to the airport and I suppose the changes arguably might lead to more trains to say Leeds or Preston, even if Hull (edit: should be Cleethorpes), Windermere and Barrow lose their direct services.

Anyway LAX, have you any good rumours? We seem to be starved of positive stories just at the moment? Maybe September and the end of the holidays will bring about a change.

I take your point Lax but not everyone is as informed as yourself.

Cancellation of the a direct train service from both The Lake District and indeed Humberside may not exactly set the juices flowing but it is relevant. I'm sure I also read somewhere that some NEast services are facing reduction.

I'm sure we all want connections extended..... not reduced !

Equally relevant (at least in my view) are the airports thoughts/comments (or not as the case may be) on issues that in my view do clearly effect them and the wider region.

In years gone by this was not the case, prior to the internet many opinion makers were very vocal, it "usually" resulted in a positive reverse !

Other than occasional missives thru the M E N there are very few opportunities to canvass opinion on exactly what the airport managers think on this and other issues !

Of course they are not obliged to reference every point simply because "a few spotters" have an opinion, note - I am not so naive to believe they have to respond to every armchair comment, but I personally would hate those same Airport Managers to "move on" a few years down the line without doing their absolute damndest to make sure they do everything they possibly can to make the place a success whilst they are in its current employ !

Their thoughts on retaining train services, retaining routes Eg Egytptair and indeed their thoughts on infrastructure planning would therefore be of real interest !

There may be much paddling below the surface ,
They may not wish to disclose "their hand

I understand and get all that but it would be good to get an occasional opinion !

Thee ONLY medium which is updated on a regular basis is twitter, but not everyone who is on here is on there , so again my last posting was very much an attempt not to "rant" but to inform and indeed try and place in context what "they" themselves are actually saying whilst other issues seemingly are not getting any airplay!

I shall however try and refrain from mentioning that horrible word "tweet" again :ok:

AND yes I do ask them DIRECT. the responses are how shall we say "off piste" .

Bagso,

I think you have mis-understood what I was saying.

I was not bemoaning the content, but more the frequency, repetitiveness and choice of outlet to which these rants come.

Yes, they are issues, but sustained posts on this particular site are not going to change that.

MANFOD,

While there is a lack of news at this particular time, little snippets of good news rarely generate much discussion, but, negative news gets posted and by god do we know about it, followed by pages of self pity. (for example Summer 2015 is still 7 months away with airlines schedules far from finalised, but the doom and gloom is already at the forefront of some peoples minds!)

Im not saying we should ignore and cover up bad news, but by god, can we not celebrate the success we do have, as its like slit-wrist central on a few forums at the moment!

Hainan Airlines
 

There is a delegation from Hainan Airlines in Manchester this week. Having met with them this morning they are "confident" in introducing a Manchester - Beijing route from late Spring, early Summer 2015. Operating a A330 4 x weekly, 186Y and initially 36J.

HAINAN

Well I shall lead the charge ...brilliant news. Fingers crossed !

Well, there you go LAX, Manchesterbound has produced a good news story with hopefully a positive outcome.

As to your point about too much doom and gloom on various forums, I think it's important to get a balance. The present growth at MAN of 6.2% in July was excellent and I suspect the summer has been better than even MAN targeted. However, looking towards winter, it has to be said that MAN's TATL schedules are disappointing even if the cuts can be rationalised due to maintenance etc. On the other hand, CX starting is a great boost and Ryanair's additional services are very welcome. Swings and roundabouts for the winter maybe.

As to summer 2015, I acknowledge that some of us may have been ultra cautious based on schedules currently loaded for some airlines and hopefully the final picture will be much brighter. Certainly MAN seem confident about continuing growth.

Do you happen to know if discussions are still ongoing with airlines regarding the possible major redevelopment of T1/T3? It must be a giant headache as to how to maintain operations, particularly if growth in passenger numbers and flights continue in the meantime.

Warning - this message contains lots of information about trains and the relevance of the new franchises from 2016 on services to Manchester Airport. People who think rail connectivity at the Airport is b*gger all to do with the prospects of the Airport should look away now....

Bagso

Any current flapdoodle about train services to / from the Airport comes as a result of the just completed consultation on the re-letting of the Northern and TPE franchises. Here's the link

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...nsultation.pdf

I'm assuming you have had your say :ok: and I'm sure the airport have done likewise, considering there are threats but also opportunities to enhance not only the range of destinations to / from the Airport, but the service quality and capacity of the trains in use..And if the Airport haven't responded :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Bagso, what you describe are some of the questions asked in the consultation and are about what routes should be specified in the Invitation to Tender for the two franchises. In an unbelievable moment of joined up thinking, DfT are looking at route swops etc between franchises and letting them both at the same time.

In respect of the South Transpennine /Cleethorpes service I recommend you read paras 5.6 -5.16. I have reproduced paras 5.12 and 5.13 below.

These are all still ideas on which everyone was asked to give their views and we will know the franchise spec soon enough when the Invitation to Tender is issued in December 2014. So the Airport to Cleethorpes service could terminate at Doncaster, or be extended to Hull, which would be a new direct train connection for the Airport.

It is also suggested that TPE could operate all the fast Sheffield - Manchester services taking over the current East Midlands Liverpool - Nottingham train. In addition, a third frequency could be added from Dec 2018 when capacity enhancements in the Hope Valley allow. The report says
This means that all three trains from Sheffield could go in theory to the Airport if the franchisee wishes although I wonder whether the paths are available. Most likely that one will remain to Liverpool and the other is up for grabs.

In respect of the Airport - Windermere and Barrow, the situation is more complex and is covered in paras 5.18 - 5.32. Barrow currently has 5 through trains a day to the airport; Windermere only has one. Both these routes plus Airport - Blackpool could be transferred to Northern. Northern would use 4 coach electrics on Blackpool instead of TPE's 3 coach diesels; there is no guarantee that Northern would run Airport - Windermere or Barrow although the consultation asked the question as to which destinations should be served.

I should add that when Northern introduce their "new" 4 coach electric units (cast offs from Thameslink) in the December 2014 timetable change, the first route is almost certainly to be Manchester Airport - Liverpool via Earlestown; so faster journeys and more capacity...

It is suggested that North Transpennine service patterns should be left to the bidders in the same way as South Transpennie because-
Paras 3.62 and 3.63 of the consultation say
I would hope that the Airport will work with the bidders and others to ensure a maximisation of relevant services to and from the Airport. There once used to be a very clued up Ground Transport Team but I'm not sure how it is handled nowadays

As far as Northern are concerned, the consultation remains silent on all routes and specifications apart from the potential route swops, so we shall have to see what comes out in the ITT specification - See Section 6 of the report if you are interested.

So there you have it. Plenty to think about.

Hanain (manchesternound)
 

Hi is this correct and when will we see it be announced roughly? This has put a amazing excitement in me!

Yes, it would be nice. However, despite the myriad of new routes this summer, despite the increase in passenger numbers and despite the improvements on hand at the airport (airport city, proposed terminal re-developments), people still find need to bemoan much, much more than celebrate.

So yes, balance would be nice, I mean, look at the Hainan rumour. Barely been questioned or congratulated (regardless as to whether it comes off), yet loosing a train link or the prospect of less flights next summer, and hey presto 2-3 pages can be reeled off with no issue. Does that sound like balance? Any casual observers to this thread would think MAN was in dire straits?

Not entirely fair comment IMHO. There is a big difference between a juicy rumour and a firm announcement. Hainan is a rumour. I honestly wouldn't rush to 'congratulate' a rumour. Most experienced contributors are very wary where rumours are concerned … too much can still go wrong. When Cathay Pacific was *confirmed*, pages of discussion rightly ensued. There was also healthy discussion of the Thomas Cook long-haul announcements. Confirmed positive developments generally do receive the attention they deserve on here. The main driver on this thread seems to be the perceived magnitude of the news item rather than whether it is perceived to be 'good' or 'bad'. That seems healthy to me. There are plenty of examples of 'bad news' stories receiving little or no attention on here as well as 'good news' items.

One example of bad news receiving no attention: Tripoli Airport was captured by Islamist extremist militia during the weekend. They burned down airport buildings and 'danced around wrecked airliners'. Charming and highly educated bunch. I think we can safely say Libyan's MAN-TIP schedule is a goner for the long term. Although in this case, our main concern has to be for the suffering of those innocent Libyan civilians who are not in thrall to barbarism reminiscent of the Middle Ages.

Meanwhile, on the subject of trains. Did anybody notice that the May 2014 timetable reorganisation left Manchester Airport with through-trains beyond York to Newcastle axed? Change at York … not good news for pax with luggage to consider. I didn't see 2-3 pages on that one either.

For me, this thread has it about right. Each discussion topic - positive and negative alike - receives the attention it merits. I have little interest in either moaning about or celebrating news snippets on here. I don't want to see the thread develop an irrational sunny / gloomy 'editorial slant'. My aim is to objectively assess and analyse developments at MAN with a view to forecasting future trends with some modicum of accuracy. Like most here, I welcome success at the airport. But for the emotional partisan cheerleading stuff it is far better to stick to the Etihad Stadium!

Data
 

Dnata starting at manchester? Full ground servicing? Apparently got Emirates from Oct and Cathay to!

If true it's a good start for Dnata!

Can anyone confirm?

Thank you Shed for your comments, which I believe to be accurate, fair and 'balanced'.

Your point about rumours being just that until an official announcement is well taken and there have indeed been examples of strong rumours either proving to be incorrect or which originally had a sound basis but which for whatever reason didn't come to fruition. The recent story of a new long haul service, which was eventually confirmed as being DL to DTW, was apparently true but plans were aborted. It was only when I asked a second time about the status (on another forum) that we were told it wasn't happening. As you say, some of us are more wary about such rumours and I have to say when they turn out not to be happening, it's a pity they are not knocked on the head as quickly as they could be sometimes.

Back to trains, and thanks to Suzeman for the extracts from that report and the link. Have to admit I did spend half an hour scanning the more interesting bits. It seems to me this particular quote that Suzeman gave is of relevance to MAN and an example of where they should be responding with vigour. Maybe they have,

"Previous work carried out by Network Rail suggests that for each of the eastern destinations (Newcastle, Middlesbrough, York, Hull or Scarborough) the wider economic benefits of a direct service to Manchester Airport are similar to the wider economic benefits of a direct service to Liverpool".


Shed, it had vaguely registered that there were no longer direct trains from the airport to Newcastle, which presumably now start at Liverpool instead.
The report refers to previous work by National Rail showing that most pax from the airport only travel to Doncaster on the Cleethorpes service and I assume a similar conclusion was reached on the Newcastle service with most going no further than York. I had also referred to the issue of having to change trains with luggage and I also feel the type of passenger, not just the number, is important. For example, changing trains for an elderly couple with heavy luggage travelling to the airport is going to be more of a hassle than to say a student with a rucksack travelling to Liverpool or vice versa. I wonder if that analysis was done. In addition, Northern Rail will need better rolling stock with more luggage space if they are to run more of the airport services.
The bottom line is that Manchester Airport should be fighting hard, if not already doing so, to ensure maximum connectivity by rail from the wider region to support and grow its air services.

They're (almost) owned by Emirates so a bit of a competitive advantage there.
Oh dear.

Quote:

Quote:
Back to trains

Oh dear.

Well Skip, if you'd rather discuss airline business models, cost benefit analysis and the advantages of LHR, fire away.

If someone could tell us how many passengers arrive/depart MAN by train, it might give a clue as to whether it's relevant in terms of connectivity and potential for further growth.

Edit: To partly answer my own question, an Airport fact sheet included the following:
"The number of passengers using the train has steadily risen as the Airport has grown and in 2007/08, around 2.5 million rail journeys were made to the Airport"

Sadly it is somewhat out of date, as it also forecasts 40m pax for MAN by 2015! If anyone has more current figures for train usage it would be helpful but even on those old figures, it's not insignificant. Aren't MAN/MAG due to produce a new long term plan?

And further, Wiki has this, based on estimated ticket sales for pax starting or ending their journeys at the airport:
"2011/12 pax 3.163 million"

Firstly, I would probably side with World Rep's comments, but everyone is allowed their opinions.

On the subject of trains, I was on the train from Newcastle yesterday which does indeed terminate in Liverpool and passengers for the airport were advised we had overtaken a train near Thirsk so they would be able to connect at Picadilly for the airport.

Finally in the FT we are advised that FR will introduce 'business class' which we could probably see at MAN I would think.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/360ac340-2...#axzz3BaRN3SCC

Yes I can confirm that CX have not signed with anyone as of yet.

Spannersatcx, Have you any indication on how forward bookings are looking and whether they are up to CX expectations?

Thanks for any info.

Average loads so far seem to be about 12-20 in J each way, 10-ish in Y+ each way and about 70-80% in Y.
While they would never tell us the true figure, fares have been quoted as 'comparable' to LHR.

Ah, thanks LAX. That looks pretty encouraging given that we're still over 3 months from the start date.

Is the configuration 40 / 32 / 268 or have I got the wrong version of the B777?

Sorry, Skip … a bit more on the airport trains! They are really important at MAN (really!) and further significant changes are on the way.

With respect to the Transpennine routes serving Manchester Airport, the Train Operating Companies seem to plan on an 'all or nothing' basis. On the Newcastle - York - Leeds - NW corridor there is an hourly service and the eventual ambition is to increase this. There is a strong case for Newcastle - Liverpool, but there is also a strong case for Newcastle - Manchester Airport. But apparently ALL trains must run exactly the same route! Is it beyond the wit of TPE to ALTERNATE these trains with a two hourly service to each destination? And in conjunction with this, alternate the corresponding hourly York - Manchester Airport service with Liverpool as well? This seems a far more sensible way to service the demand and keep everybody happy. And, by the way, the new set-up also means there is now NO link between Manchester Piccadilly and Newcastle / Durham / Darlington [Newcastle - Liverpool ops via Victoria] … also important for many transfers.

MAG does have a role to play in knocking some heads together at TPE, Northern Trains and the Office of the Rail Regulator. Northern is currently proposing to introduce an 'evening peak period' rule which will destroy the utility of most Ranger/Rover tickets too. Inspired thinking out of these companies of late. What price creativity and common sense?

Shed on a pole
 

I agree trains are very important part of any integrated transport policy particularly at an international airport like MAN

i 'm surprised that you can't do the airport to NCL though? i would have thought you could change at Leeds for York and onto NCL or do you mean without changing trains, frequency is important of course and given the variable nature of luggage retrieval a frequency of less than hourly is unacceptable unless less its to somewhere off the beaten track (no pun intended)

Some absolute classics in this thread recently. Talk about glass half empty syndrome.

The TPE timetable since May is the best thing to happen for a long while on that desperately overcrowded route. 20 mins off the journey to Liverpool from York and Leeds, doubled frequency on that run, direct to Victoria on a half decent train still with four an hour to Piccadilly. It's an improvement. OK if you're going from Newcastle to Mcr Airport you have to get off at Leeds and stand on platform 16 for 10 mins. Interworking the trains --all very well until something goes wrong, a cancellation happens, then it's a mess.

At least in Yorkshire the rover/ranger ticket validity other than the WY Day Rover is unaffected by the changes to off peak fares. (nothing whatever to do with air travel BTW).

One North---have you guys got any idea what lining up five different lots of politicians both local and central with subtly different priorities involves? The initial report was a good effort in the time and there is a lot going on. More important right now to get ducks in a row than make a lot of untargetted noise .

Moderator--sorry if this is insufficiently on message.

anothertyke -

I'm glad you think this topic is a classic. The TPE timetable change is an overall improvement but there are winners and losers. Manchester Airport pax to / from the NE are clear losers. Luggage is a huge issue for holidaymakers changing at York … I've had to do this in the past and the number of times the onward reserved seats have been scrubbed is beyond a joke. TPE love scrapping the seat reservations on busy PH & Christmas trips. Stand York to Newcastle! Well, many can't / won't do this. Note that alternating the final destinations on the York - Airport and Newcastle - Liverpool runs would NOT require additional paths. The trains run already.

My future journeys on this route will be with National Express TFN … assured seats, cheaper too. But to show that the glass is 'half-full' elsewhere, services up the WCML from Manchester Airport to Edinburgh and Glasgow are significantly improved. Blackpool is well served too. We'll see what the fourth heavy rail platform brings to the airport when that comes on line.

By the way … the bit about local Ranger tickets not affecting the airport … ever heard of STAFF?

Whoah when did China Airlines start MAN-TPE? #amazing
Oh wait. It's trains isn't it. Trains......still :confused:

Yes, should be the non F class subfleet at the start anyway, one from
B-KPY/Z
B-KQA/B/C/D/E/F/L +

Skip, thanks for that confirmation of the CX configuration. 340 is a lot of seats to fill but previous data from MAN has shown HK to be one of its most unserved routes. I guess selling a good proportion of those 40 J class seats at proper prices is key as I'd be very surprised if they don't get decent loads at the back.

I guess the HKG route is pencilled in for daily A359 when they arrive at CX? Unless we can fill a daily 77W by then ;)