But why would they leave BOH? What incentive is there?

Think this was meant from a purely operational/field performance perspective. The airport have said all along that the extension is for 320/738 ops so wouldn't rule 738 out completely, albeit unlikely to be RYR!

Its not just the runway extension that matters,its the obstacles on 20 climb out including Marhill copse,has anything changed there?

THIS is the pertinent issue that an extra 137m on the end of runway 20 sadly won't solve. SOU is hugely performance limited on that runway due to these trees, and unless the airport can figure out a way around this issue (as the council keep rejecting their woodland management applications), the problem will only get worse as the trees continue to grow.
The runway extension will help a little bit on its own, but I don't think it's enough to suddenly open SOU up to commercially-viable summer jet operations without the obstacle environment changing significantly.
At the moment runway 02 is often requested by the current operators for performance reasons whenever they're heavily loaded due to it's less-restrictive obstacle environment.

Marlhill Woods continues to be an issue for the airport and something they will need to remedy in the near future for improved operations, however an A320 to the Med region I don’t see as a problem once the extended runway is open as they can lift off from a fairly short runway length in most conditions, but 738 is a different beast and most likely not possible!

ICAO did issue a state letter recently with proposals to update the Obstacle Limitation Surface parameters but it will be a few years until that happens.
The revised surfaces are designed to take current aircraft performance into account. I wonder if that will help the cause for SOU?

I get the impression that SOU management thought those pesky trees would be cut down without any issues, which isn’t going to happen, so removing some of the benefits of the runway extension.

Those who fought and lost the battle to stop the runway extension will now put their efforts into making sure those trees are not touched to limit the impact of the runway extension. With preservation orders served on some of those trees they are off to a good start.

Yes, Pesky Trees indeed....

TCASman is the 'Go To' chap for the Runway obstacle and clearway operational issues for SOU, for both Pre and Post runway extension.

I am no Naysayer, I love using SOU and follow its progress closely.
But,
As someone above quite rightly pointed out in their quote ''An awful lot of eggs have been put in an orange coloured basket'' does make for a good and debatable question.

Re the 737-800NG operations - Let us please get this misnomer correct,
SOU Directors have never said that the Runway Extension was suitable for Ops in/out of SOU with this type.
The Management stated clearly when announcing that the runway works were to go-ahead, that the Extension was to provide 'Existing aircraft types' to be able to fly to destinations further afield with a commercial payload.

Another fellow Poster quoted:
''however an A320 to the Med region, I don’t see as a problem once the extended runway is open as they can lift off from a fairly short runway length in most conditions, but 738 is a different beast and most likely not possible!''

Yes,
but even the EZY GVA and the Volotea PMI has faced Payload restrictions in the past - Albeit this was IIRC, due to the lower powered performance of the A319.

We know and hope that BACF is 'safe' for Summer 24, but this is a seasonal 'weekend only' operation, with TUI Holidays adding 2 more BACF PMI charter rotations in addition to the scheduled BA flights, plus the BACF winter weekend Ski flights to CMF & SZG.

We also see a new small Domestic series from EZY starting this Autumn.

​​​​​​​Apart from those, there is no other input so far, for more Airlines and services flying from SOU.

Would be grateful if you could provide a link to the State Letter. Have my doubts that it will have any positive impact.

An earlier change to OLS in Annex 14 did benefit SOU due to the reduction of runway strip width from 150 to 140 metres, which improved the obstacle limitations beneath the 1:7 Transitional Surface. This resulted in larger aircraft being able to park nose in Stands 7-12.

In the past SOU thrived only on flybe presence,we all know how that eventually played out!
​​​​​Easy could come in with some routes,but like SEN could withdraw them just as quick!
Without Orange,what other airline could fufill the limited field options even with the extension at SOU?

Vueling might offer something to a few Spanish destinations.

Wizz, Volotea, Jet2, TUI could all be options if they can satisfy themselves of the new runway/obstacle performance data. I don’t buy this argument that regular 738 services will never operate from the airfield although time will tell. I would still place a cheeky bet on EXS planning something down the line but that’s just my opinion before posters get on my back!

Well LOL, getting right on your literlal back, although this 737NG issue is now getting all rather tedious, I can assure you that it ain't gonna happen even in this decade...
Unless you want to propose on your bended knee to TUI, Jet2, and Ryanair to operate very payload restricted flights.
Or, by all means do go-ahead and get yourself a few secondhand examples and do try it...
Come back to us on that one :8;) (very broke):ouch:

Jet2 will have new A320Neos, but not for a long time, until the first orders arrive in 2028, so all bets on them are off for a while.

Vueling IMO are pretty awful, the Ryanair or Spirit Airlines of Spain, and they are frankly dire, as are Wizz too -
Their reputations go before them, and I cannot see the SOU catchment grabbing them at all...These airlines go into airports and are 'here today', and 'gone tomorrow'.

Wow, don’t we know it all and thanks for the arrogant reply. Please remember your thoughts and believes may not be the same as the next person!

No, YOU bit LOL Didn't you see the smiley emojis ...:) >?

Chill up darling, lighten up a little, its Pprune, and it's Southampton wink ;);) pour a nice G&T, and it's all good.

It was all 'tongue in'' as they say - sorry u got a tad offended

I would venture to suggest that given the professional experience of @rog747 as he has made it public on this forum, while nobody 'knows it all' he is one of the more qualified voices on UK commercial aviation who posts here!

I can fly to Amsterdam and back and the fare is cheaper than the car park. By the way the air fare itself is made up of several airport rip-off charges....the airline gets a fraction of the ticket cost. Can't even save a few quid by using the never-available long term car park. Does this airport have a death wish???????

Please no more bad news for SOU,lets have some route announcements

S24 routes
 

This isn't the grand headline people are hoping for but the following airlines have S24 flights on sale at the moment from Southampton already. Good to see Loganair maintaining higher frequencies, and let's remember that they have previously publicly stated that the runway extension will benefit their E145 operations.

Are Lingus/Emerald

Belfast - ~2 daily
Dublin - ~2 daily

BA Cityflyer

Looks similar to S23 - Alicante/Bergerac/Faro/Limoges/Palma/Malaga 1-2 weekly
​​​​​​
Blue Islands

Jersey - 3 daily

KLM Cityhopper

Amsterdam - 2 daily

Loganair

Edinburgh - ~5 daily
Glasgow - ~5 daily
Newcastle - ~3 daily

TUI

Palma - 2 weekly (BA Cityflyer)

S24
 

Many thanks for taking the trouble to note S24's plans for SOU, just wondered about both Blue Islands and Aurigny to GCI Guernsey (and Aurigny to Alderney) are set to continue ?

EZY are on sale for their BFS and GLA flights until the end of March.
Aer Lingus operate to Belfast City.

ATNotts- Thank you for your kind repose - I hope not to come over as a ''know it all'', yes at times it could be seen as that by some, but not my intention, but only to share life work experiences here, and perhaps offer some 'local' knowledge too.