Weather
 

Correct, cancellations don't count but folks tend to forget cancellations which occurred in previous years when making comparisons.

Here's the press release.

http://mediacentre.magairports.com/mags-three-airports-serve-4-million-more-passengers-in-2017/

The Jewish Telegraph now reporting that ELAL are close to launching flights. Says should be up and running by April but could be as early as March.

Will it be El Al mainline, or Up?

Up is being absorbed back into mainline. Was originally down as Sun’dor but supposedly mainline now.

Thomas Cook have brought forward the launch of Marrakech from 4th November to 10th October.

Does anyone know what (if any) plans exist to renovate the existing part of the terminal 2 building (including the remaining pier) as part of the Transformation Programme?

Cheers in advance.

The quality of reporting in the Jewish Telegraph is not of the quality one would guarantee the flights will commence anytime close to the dates mentioned.

As mentioned previously, El Al will have to compete with a strong EZY product. People I have spoken to who remember (like me) the last time El Al flew into Manchester, are hoping the timings will be a lot better. No one wants a very early departure from Tel Aviv nor a late (after say 22:00) arrival back. They would be better to night stop in Manchester but that would be very unlikely.

The times in Chroma for ELAL are 1930 arrival and 2100 departure.

There are loads of images online showing what the whole redevelopment will look like once completed just do a search plus on YouTube but to answer your question yes there is as the whole of Terminal 2 will be totally transformed but an easy search online will show you CGI images plus videos.

Cheers, had done so, and most (likely all) renders show the new extension, as opposed to the existing building. From what you can see in the latest fly through, the existing building remaining as it is now.

Of course, these don't necessarily represent an accurate view of the plans, hence throwing the question out to the floor!

Beware the uncontrolled out of date material in the public domain. There have been a number of significant design changes including different pier build sequences, car parks, and there will probably continue to be changes to interior fit out even during the build. The latest official MAG fly-through does show the inside of the refurbished existing T2 building (which retains its glass atrium). Once the extension opens in 2020 the old building starts internal reconfiguration to complement the new part, plus a start on Pier 3 which builds out from the front of the old building.

The extension was previously to be +140% of the existing footprint but has been scaled back to around +100%. It will still be a rather large terminal.

Is the summer program for Manchester now set in stone or are we expecting more announcements?

The slot handback was today, so, slots left after this date have more chance of happening. Still not certain, but, there is a better chance.

Cheers Roverman, the bit that sticks in my mind as being the same as it is now is the check in area. I'd assume the teardrop style bag drop areas would be replicated (perhaps also the security area).

Sorry it has dropped to 100% expansion (is this the building footprint or floor space?). It feels like It would create relatively modest savings and perhaps mean the space becomes constrained in future years. Obviously MAG look at these things in detail so it's not intended to be a criticism.

Look forward to seeing the final outcome when it arrives.

"Sorry it has dropped to 100% expansion (is this the building footprint or floor space?)."

Good question Dobbo Dobbo.

roverman, are you able to say whether the reason for the reduced expansion area is to keep the project within the agreed budget, or have expected capacity requirements been revised such that they can efficiently be accommodated within a smaller area. And are there any implications regarding the number of contact and remote stands?

Thanks as always for your input.

Hi Roverman

I wondered if you could answer a query that has come to my notice looking at the fly-throughs.

some of the aircraft seem to have the arms attached to the right hand side of the aircraft, is this just artistic license, or is this the plan?

This was discussed a number of months ago on another forum and the error was put down to artistic license (as you have intimated).

Queries
 

Reduction in building footprint was a refining of the design to include the desired functions and capacity within a slightly smaller building. The building has some later vertical extensions which may a relocating of H&V plant.

Airbridges serving the right side of aircraft are not a feature. I think what appears to be this in the fly through is actually the 'spare' airbridge (when a stand block is in use for 2 x wide body rather than 3 x narrow body). One airbridge will be parked and retracted away from the aircraft in this mode. In the simulation it is shown close to the right side of one of the wide bodies, which is just an anomaly of the presentation.

Thanks for the replies