Once the airline went into administration, any assets were frozen prior to the administrators eventually dstrbuting funds based upon payments by creditors. In the case if British Eagle International Airlines, it took 40 years to complete the wind up. Most of the aircraft were never the property of Flybe and once a formal winding up commenced,
were released to their rightful owners, the lessors.Flybe limited are a completely new Airline with nothing orher than existing liabilities connected to start up costs. Ir's UK company law, get it?

Do not dispute company law, however in common with other UK airport operators pursuant to the provisions of Section 88 (1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 the airport manager is able (and presumably did) detain Flybe Mk1 aircraft for non payment of airport charges. Maybe the reason why aircraft remained at SOU for sometime after the airline ceased operations?

Swissport, the SOU handling company, is not covered by this section of the Civil Aviation Act and therefore would have needed to stand in line with other creditors to claim whatever pittance, if any, was left when funds were distributed.

The Swissport CEO is the same guy that was the Stobart CEO who had very strong influence on/with the previous Flybe. There is effectively no bad blood between the two organisations anyway.

[QUOTE=SKOJB;11207252]They are now charging £69.99 each way for some dates - which includes 15kg of luggage. FlyBe with luggage starts at £66.99. It's going to be a scrap!

Has anyone heard what is happening with the appeal against the runway extension?

Believe it’s being heard within next few weeks

Fingers crossed they sort it asap and they can crack on with it.

Things really looking up at the airport. 30 arrivals tomorrow and for the first time a full schedule of BA flights with 14 inbound!

KL Friday schedule change from 8-Jul-22
 

KL have re-timed KL919/920 from evening to morning (1010/1050 at SOU) from 8-Jul-22 until 26-Aug-22 with no flight at all on Friday 5-Aug-22.

Good to see the airport picking up,but apart from weekends the PAX numbers are not exciting,simply domestic routes are now limited and unlightly to provide long term survival for the airport. The only route to survival and development is for the airport to have its runway extension finally approved.Bournemouth have diversified and seem to be doing very well.
Let's hope for a positive announcement very soon,but for Southampton it's critical that the decision does not go against it.

as a local resident I have to say I like the airport just the way it is. I feel sure that extension or no extension the airport will continue just fine. looking forward to the French routes re starting soon .

Why does the very survival of the airport depend on a marginal runway extension? SOU's core bread and butter will surely remain what it has done well with in recent years? That is one VERY constrained site very close to Gatwick. It is what it is and that's fine, there's nothing wrong in being a decent niche.

It doesn’t. I doubt the extra flights a longer runway would bring would cover the cost of the extension. It is not as if SOU has an abundance of spare stands.

According to a report on this evening’s BBC South Today a ruling has been given to indicate the EBC’s planning consent for the runway extension was lawful. Standby for an appeal?

As long as the anti expansion campaigners can get the financial help there will be a further appeal.
It's a waste of money,but further delays Im afraid,in the meantime airports recover and gain holiday routes!.

Very disappointed with the report from the normally well informed BBC South Travel Correspondent Paul Clifton. He has done the airport no favours with:"It wants to be able to handle larger planes....." Thought and hoped that the previous airport operator's own goal of wanting the runway extension to accomodate "larger aircraft" was dead and burried to avoid playing into the tree huggers and anti airport lobbyists' hands.

Paul also then mentions Ryanair as a potential operator, don't think we'll ever see them at SOU.

What the airport corporate PR person says publicly as a reason for extending the runway.... and what the airport management intend privately may not be the same. It is the job of a journalist to be aware of this difference.

Is not the term “off the record” relevant?

He's well informed on trains, but should do his homework or leave aviation alone I think.

I've tweeted him before that his words haven't helped SOU and to be fair he did respond, but only to say he has only a short time to try to articulate a complex issue, so has to do it in a way that Joe Public will understand