Sheffield City Airport Petition
 

The Federation of Small Businesses have started a petition calling for Sheffield City Airport to be re-opened. It seems Sheffield's business community has finally spotted that Doncaster has failed to provide anything which could be described as a business route. Shame it took so long for everybody to work out that the two are (were?) operating in completely different markets. Here's the link to the petition;

Redevelopment of Sheffield City Airport - PetitionBuzz

Could it be that Sheffield might eventually stop being 'the largest city in Europe WITHOUT its own airport'?

What a ridiculous petition. Why did Sheffield City close in the first place? Airlines could not make money flying from it as the demand was not there.

If there was the demand suitable routes would be flown from Robin Hood. As they are not, they most certainly would not be flown from Sheffield City.

Do you know where Sheffield City Airport was Groundloop? Or the circumstances around the closure?

Groundloop might like to do a little research on the subject before dismissing this so casually...

Two of the factors which contributed to its demise were its lack of controlled airspace and secondly its lack of radar to provide some level of protection to its arrivals and departures while in Class G airspace.

A number of airproxes which occurred with Shefield traffic persuaded carriers that they could not adequately mitigate the hazards faced when operating in Class G without radar cover.

The CAA requires each carrier considering Class G operations to carry out a risk assessment to show that the level of risk can be reduced to as low as reasonably practicable. Controlled airspace would have helped, but was not attainable at the time due to the relatively few air transport movements and passenger throughput. Bit of a "checken and egg" situation.

Radar could have solved it, but appears to have been beyond the reach of investment funds available.

You don't appear to understand the problems, Groundloop. Airline Scams and Scandals describes them in detail.

TCAS FAN, thanks for the info, something I havent seen mentioned elsewhere. Its well known that when the airport was taken over, and as soon as the last commercial flight left, other necessary functions were removed or downgraded which meant no commercial passenger service could operate from there. This after only three years of being opened.

The argument that Peel tried to kill off the airport because they were about to open Robin Hood is not born out by passenger numbers.

Passenger numbers had dropped from a peak of 75,000 in 1999, to 60,600 in 2000 to 33,000 in 2001 just as Peel took over ( ie less than 100 pax day in 2001).

So I'm afraid the figures don't back up the Peel Group conspiracy theorists.

There was me thinking infrastructure assets had to be given time... :ugh: Im lead to believe that the airport exceeded initial forecasts during the three years it was handling scheduled services.

Its hardly a conspiracy theory. Peel, a property developer, were given the land for £1.00 which could be redeveloped provided they proved that the airport wasnt viable by 2008. Its quite easy, when you have other regional interests, to 'prove' Sheffield City is not viable. Particularly if you are to remove necessary infrastructure required for commercial flights..

I dont think anyones blaming Peel Holdings for doing what most property developers would do.

Thanks to TCAS FAN for the background on airspace issues.

Of course, Sheffield City Airport's airspace situation would be a little different if it was to reopen today, with all that Class D airspace starting just 2nm to the east. The lower limits are currently too high, but the precedent has been set..

If Peel were given the airport for just £1.00 it should be obvious that the Council were desperate to offload a dead (or at least dying judging by the rapidly falling pax numbers) duck.

I suggest you go off and research it, then come back. At tge moment you clearly havent a clue.

I recall when a STOLPORT at Sheffield was announced jumping on the Plymouth STOLPORT and subsequently London City STOLPORT theme, if I recall correctly Sheffield City Airport was the brainchild of a BCal, or ex BCal, pilot.

LCY started off, literally, as a DHC7 runway and, over the years, it has been extended and extended, had the runway remained at it's original length then I have no doubt that it would have, before now, met the same fate as Sheffield and Plymouth.

On the subject of PLH they extended the runway to, literally, maximum to accommodate DHC8 and ATR42 size and performance aircraft but alas these sizes of aircraft operations couldn't compete with the LoCo operators of larger, more economical per passenger, aircraft and last year PLH met it's fate.

So if Sheffield re-opens is a runway extension possible whereas, let's say, Q400 etc. operator(s) could operate or is it likely to remain restricted to 'Puddle Jumper' operations making it nonviable before it may even reopen?

Q400s sometimes operate from the shorter runway 03/21 at IOM which is 1255m long, so SZD at 1211m surely would be feasible. At least DSA is available nearby for diversions in bad weather! F70 ops to get KLM back might be trickier, but there's space for a short extension to match LCY I'd suggest. I hope the petition succeeds as it would be a criminal waste to dig it up after it was stolen from the council tax payer. Hopefully one day there might be some money around to get it going again - there's a rail line right next to it so it would be easy to add to the tram network. It would be of great benefit to the Advanced Manufacturing Park which is developing apace across the road.

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=she...94641,-1.39090

What is the point in this?
If business routes were possible, why not use DSA which is a 20 minute drive away.
The demand isn't there.

Surely the fact that it wasn't '20 minutes drive away' gave it the competitive advantage over heading to MAN and going direct? Surely the ability to take bizjets straight in was contributing to the Sheffield economy?

The point of the petition? To stimulate debate and hopefully get the enquiry that has thus far not been forthcoming.

I've read the petition. Not one figure on there to even start off a business case. Exactly who is supposed to put the money up for this?

I can think of only two 'city' airports in Europe that seem to have some commercial success:

1. London (capital city, specifically serves one of the world's most important financial centres)
2. Florence (major international tourist destination).

With respect, Sheffield is neither of these, and both have significantly longer runways than SZD.

I wouldn't contemplate a 'city' airport in any British region. No economic case, especially given the multitude of full size airports.

Its not a business proposal, t is a petition for an independent enquiry...

True, but it goes back to 'What is the point...'

Why spend time and effort on something that is dead in the water?

BKS - a couple of things;

1.) would you really expect a petition to present a fully-costed business case?

2.) let's add a few others to that list of yours - Antwerp, Belfast City, Lugano, Southampton. The number of 'city' airports in Europe is quite small because most big European cities are fortunate enough to have a full-size airport close-by. Sheffield is unusual in being so far from an airport with a full-size runway (let's not dwell on that business about Robin Hood being 20min away... South Yorkshire Police would no doubt appreciate a few more details on that). So Sheffield was at a huge disadvantage until Sheffield City Airport was built.

Timmy W wrote:

Apart from not having a Ferrari like you seem to, for once we're in agreement! For business jets, Donny isn't that far away and will be quicker once the approved link road is built.

@ NORMAN

All four of your airports have longer runways than SZD. Both Belfast and Southampton can accomodate jets so cannot really be compared.

You can start a petition for anything, but it is pointless if there is nobody with money who can bring it to reality. Does anyone behind the petition have such funding or know where it can be found? They don't say so, do they?

How about Monchengladbach ... That is/was a City Airport that has succumbed to the demise of a number of other City Airports.

It is a petition for an independent public enquiry.. You agreed with me when I pointed that out in a previous post. For reasons such as the one linked to below.

Sheffield City Airport

I seem to remember a couple of years ago that a local business man had tried to approach Peel with an offer to buy the airport to no avail. I cant find the original story online however.

A 120 metre runway extension was approved just prior to Peel taking over. Would be interested to know whether any further extension would have been feasible.

The ultimate aim behind starting the petition is to end up with, sooner or later, a reopened airport handling public transport aircraft. Please correct me if I am wrong on this.

There is not one mention of who might fund or operate such a venture, which is not surprising as it has been tried and failed. The runway is/was too short, and there was insufficient demand from business pax to make the flights it could offer viable.

Of course Peel will try and otherwise develop it, that is their duty to their shareholders.

Now, I'd love BA to start a service from Leeds to New York. I could soon set up a petition and no doubt get plenty of signatures on it. Would BA take any notice? No, of course not, as it would lose money like no tomorrow.

My point? Why spend time petitioning for something that isn't going to happen?

The FSB started up the petition, if you think they are in the wrong or naive then I suggest you contact them. Is it possible that they may know more than me or you on the matter, being quite a large organisation and all?

Ive already mentioned one person who approached Peel with an offer.

Last ditch bid to save Sheffield city airport - Local Business - Sheffield Telegraph

Is it in the Sheffield tax payers best interest for the airport to be sold for £1.00 for it to be redeveloped to great benefit of the developer? Are you another one suggesting that airports should turn a profit over night, or that business routes can establish themselves over night? If that were the case then I can think of a number of airports that should be closed by now.

My point. They are petitioning for an independent public enquiry before the runway is dug up. Something that should have been done years ago, particularly as alot of public money was invested in the scheme. I appologise if I'm not being clear, I'm not saying that the airport was/is definately viable, but that there should be an impartial enquiry into the matter. Its very easy for a property developer to prove the operation non viable if they have other (more profitable) ideas for the site.

They should re-open it as a heliport. It's ideally placed as it sits about halfway up the country.

And public enquiries cost the PUBLIC money. So they are asking for more public money to be poured down the drain at a time of cutbacks.

If they think there is a strong case for the airport to be reopend they should have the courage of their convictions and club together and make Peel an offer they can't refuse.

Public Enquiries are money pits for lawyers...I bet there`s one beavering away behind the scenes on this one..

Not read the links I've posted then? I still havent found the original link to the story of the local millionaire businessman who had attempted to talk to Peel re. a takeover and was unsiccessful in even getting a response.

It may be just me, but I find that some people on here are all too happy to dismiss something they have a clear lack of knowledge of, without even bothering to do their own research beyond a quick glance at wikipedia.

Ok, so the FSB start by comparing the airport to London City and its 3m pasengers. Naive on two counts

1. Runway length. London City's runway is 23% longer. Very significant.
2. Comparing Sheffield's potential passenger catchment profile with London City's is nonsensical. The same goes for their attempt to compare their situation with Toronto.

They want to hold up development of the site whilst an expensive public enquiry is held. Are they offering to pay for it? No. Are they offering to subsidise an operational airport if they get their way? No.

Which MP's are supporting it? Is the council supporting it?

Size of an organistion is no guarantee of common sense.

Will I write to the FSB and tell them this? No. I will content myself by not signing their petition, and having a wry smile when it ends up where it belongs.

I do tend to support the view that Sheffield is held back by a lack of suitable aviation links at present, but Robin Hood is the way forward.

Exactly. DSA is a short journey away - why not begin business traffic from there if there is a need for it?

From a GA perspective Finningly is simply too expensive. The handling charge for a 172 is 78 quid and thus the place is dead. There is also a fair swell of opinion that once Peel has got the council to pay for all the roads to be redeveloped the place will close and morph into industrial units as well.

Nottingham Tollerton exists yet EMA only 12 miles away. So it can be done. You also only have to look at some where like Staverton which appears to be going from strength to strength and I would say Sheffield has a much larger population.

But then that’s missing the point the place was doomed from the moment it was sold for a quid with the proviso that it can be redeveloped after 10 years.

Peel don't own the majority now do they though?

Although, I do share the opinion, that unless there is a change at DSA soon, it will cease to be.

BBC Radio Sheffield - Rony Robinson, Robin Hood Airport

I take it that someone credible wanted to buy the airport is inconveniant to your argument?

pug - what is your agenda against DSA?

Seems there is suddenly some overhwhelming need for Sheffield to have an airport on its doorstep, yet those moaning about it are unaware (or unwilling to remember) that one is already in spitting distance up the M18.

Is it the fact that it doesn't lie within the Sheffield boundaries that is the sticking point with some folk? Certainly appears so. If there is such demand, then just operate the flights from DSA.

I have no agenda against DSA, but it seems a strange accusation for you to make Timmy considering your posting history.

Ive said enough on here anyway, its interesting that the FSB petition is generating discussion and I suppose thats half the point of it.

Well they should have been sent back to Billund (also a city airport if you count all that plastic) Toyland International to look after the driving school then!

Not sure one route to a remote Danish village with a seasonal tourist attraction is quite the best way to "turn round" an airport, but it does at least have plenty of models of other destinations to think about!

Well they are the FSB, not the FLB.

It is a simple question of accounting. You are making the assumption that the site starts off having a positive present value. Airports as going concerns have huge operational costs, so even if the land does have value, better get rid of the thing for £1 than run a loss making airport for donkeys years - which I can assure you never happened at CVT!

The other challenge is that even if the land might be developed, the site might still need a huge clean up job, and any planning application could be subject to hefty Section 106 (planning gain) clauses.

It wasn't stolen. It was bought for £1, with a whole load of clauses attached. So if someone buys a house for £1, spends a huge amount of time and effort doing it up, and then sells it on for a profit a thief too?
Business doesn't work on hopefully and one day. Either there is a business case to do something, in which case someone can give it a go, or there isn't. Even in the case of the former, having a business case and executing it are two different things.

Airports don't develop for the sake of a few industrial units. For routes to succeed, they need volume, and they also need that volume to generate the right yields. If a very large bank was moving its whole operations to Sheffield, then it might be slightly different.
No it wouldn't. Rail systems are far more than just a case of linking bits of metal. You need to ensure system compatibility and, like the airport itself, you need a business case.

Firstly, branch lines into airports tend to get built when the airport hits somewhere around the 5-20m pax pa mark, clearly well outside the scope of what's been talked about.

Secondly, even if the airport was busy enough, you'd have to take a branch of at Carbrook, thus watering down the service to Meadowhall. Now let's work this one out - serve a thriving (albeit horrid) shopping centre or a tiny airport?

More to the point, rail is the biggest reason why the airport isn't going to work here. The most important destination regional airports want is London, but London is just too close. PLH nose dived when it lost the LGW route. For all their flaws, trains started from 3 hours PLH-Paddington.

Sheffield to London trains aren't the best either - they are no quicker than Manchester or Leeds to London, but you do have an hourly headway on the faster services, and overall two trains per hour.

So the plane can't win on overall journey time or frequency to London, and this isn't a loco facility so you can't take the trains on over cost either.

So I'm with groundloop on this one.