ALDERNEY

[southender]

An article in yesterday's Echo (Local paper for Southend area) suggests that a South Essex businessman has bid £10m to operate Alderney Airport.

Terry Holding who owns one of the largest car salvage companies in the country has offered to inject the money over a five year period with the intention of building a new terminal and up grading facilities in return for a long lease on the airport.

With current losses of approx. £0.5m per year the scheme is apparently being backed by the Guernsey authorities who are looking to enter into a joint venture with Mr. Holding.

Mr. Holding, who operates a Piper Cub and Cessna from his own airstrip, is well known in local aviation circles for his banner towing activities over south Essex with politically motivated messages.

If this happens, could it be the start of big developments on Alderney?

Cheers

Southender

[GBALU53]

With blueisland having a good connection with Alderney with (Rockhopper) and the company will have four Jetstreams operating by the summer season, will Alderney have a runway a Jetstream will be able to operate into and out of????

If this was to be the case it would be very good news for this northern Channel Island they need tourism just like the other Islands.:ok: :ok:

[Gulf Julliet Papa]

Alderney is not big enough for the J32s. Also i dont believe there is the market to run a more expensive and complex aircraft out of alderney (ie. turboprop vs piston)

[GBALU53]

I know Alderney is not long enough at the moment the Jetstream will only require a short extension.

If you have not operated into and out of Alderney you need to look up the information in the UK Aip on runway clearences as there are no real problems for a small extension.

The second part is that Blueislands own a hotel or two on Alderney and the possible extension to the runway would give the company a bigger field for there Hotel clientel.

We would hope all parties will work together to make this big investment into Alderney successful.:ok: :ok:

Alderney is a great place for short brakes walking golfing bird watching so there is great potensional for this big investment.

[five zero by ortac]

News of a possible airfield operator for the airport is great news for Alderney. This place is like portacabin-city and needs new facilities urgently, something that the States of Guernsey don't want to provide.
Runway not long enough for J32 ops. However, recently heard talk of extending to 1200m and attempts are being made to acquire land at the east end of 26/08. Could all be linked with new operator?
Rockhopper (blueislands) are about to announce a much reduced schedule.:* Flights from Alderney to BOH, JER and Shoreham are all being cutback. Can't see why as their new hotel opens here this summer. :hmm:
Once again, a carrier is born in Alderney, then runs away to the other islands thinking they can make more money! :mad:

[Gulf Julliet Papa]

im sure rockhopper / bis will increase frequencys again during summer. however over winter there is simply no demand. An airline must cut back schedules when there is no demand, why fly a schedule which makes no money? I think the carrier will continue flying to alderney....possibly at a much greater schedule than before this summer. as well as flying the new (more profitable routes) out of jersey

[GBALU53]

Five Zero By Ortac.

You must be at the heart of all the goings on on the northern rock.

We all look back at the good old days but it is good to see an outsider willing to give Alderney a revival of the good old times ( We can live in hope)???.

If the runway extension is part of the multi million pound injection the Jetstream operation of Blue Islands would like a very good thing and who knows the one and only Shed (G-BPFN) could even participate on the Sou run.

With more parking for commercial aircraft in the plan it does imply more operations.:ok: :ok: :ok: :ok:

[Guern]

I would imagine that Healthspan's customers would much prefer to be able to fly to Alderney without going on a Trislander or Islander.

[GBALU53]

Shamrock7Seal

May i suggest you look at the Rockhopper thred and this might reveal all if you did not know this was there preveous life in aviation:ok:

[five zero by ortac]

Just been to a public meeting in Alderney where Mr Holdings' outline plans for the airport were unvailed. Very briefly, new terminal:ok: , fire station::bored: , atc;) , extended runway to 1200m:D , increased apron:) , payable car parking:{ , new hangar:ok: , and (much to the disgust of the general public - who presumably don't fly anywhere!!!:* ) an air-park consisting of 5-8 units with runway access to fund the exercise:rolleyes: . :ok: :ok: :ok: Good luck Mr Holding. Interesting times ahead.

[niknak]

I know little about Alderney, but I do know a fair bit about developing airports and what it costs to do so.
£10m will not cover half of what has been quoted by five by zero.
Once the airport is sold, the present owners get no income from it & I doubt that the States would let it be sold for nothing.

So before he can redevelop the airport, Mr Holding has to buy it, after which he has to fork out for:

New runway (it will probably have to be entirely rebuilt rather than extending) with basic lighting: £3m
New terminal and re equipped ATC facility & new Fire station £4m
New apron: £ 1- 2m
New hanger £ 1- 2m.
Costs of air park construction £1m.

Even in the best case scenario, the bill goes beyond £10m on facilities which I understand need upgrading now - not over the next five years - otherwise the airport will not attract new operators to get the financial return.


I am all for private enterprise and business success, but the people of Alderny should be asking some serious questions of Mr Holding's ability to sustain the investment and exactly where the money is coming from.
I assume that much of it will be borrowed, how will the debt be serviced until the new revenue starts flowing in?

Like many islands, the airport is a vital part of Alderny's infrastructure and they can't afford to lose the facility if the promises didn't materlialise.

[GBALU53]

With the sad loss of a multi million pound investment in Alderney Airport what happen now.

The two Airlines that operate into Alderney must be very disapointed with the withdrawel of fundings.:sad: :sad:

[southender]

Terry Holding has withdrawn his offer of £10m to upgrade Alderney Airport.

According to the report in yesterday's Echo, the Islander's "hostile" reaction to his plans forced him to reconsider the proposal.

Apparently more than 200 residents attended a public meeting in Alderney where the mood was described as sceptical, hostile and lacking any enthusiasm or support for the development plans.

Mr Holding's company HBC continues to believe their proposals represent an opportunity to develop and secure the future of the Airport, but they are not prepared to impose themselves on the unwilling Islanders.

The Channel Islands' Public Sector Department is said to be disappointed that the proposal has been withdrawn as it was worthy of further consideration and represented an opportunity to safeguard the future of Alderney Airport.

The Public Services Department of the States of Alderney will be meeting shortly to consider the furure of the airport.

Cheers

Southender

[niknak]

What a suprise.

The island needs the airport, the airport needs the island.

Until the Channel Islands decide to ditch Alderney, the States will have an obligation to ensure that they maintain public services across the board.
If they are really feeling the pinch in Jersey because of Alderney Airport it's a very sad day which will be easily rectified by extracting another penney or so from the poor little dears who live there for tax reasons alone.:{

[Guern]

NikNak

Oh that it was the Jersey tax payer paying for Alderney airport!! I think you find it is us lot in Guernsey paying for it! Jersey has no financial connection with Alderney they are not connected.

Contrary to popular belief we don't have that many millionaires, most of us locals are just trying to make an honest living. Very few live in Guernsey for tax reasons, the UK killed most of that off years ago and th erest of us were born here.

[GBALU53]

Well said Guern

I do think before people make a comment they should try the product.

So Niknak you need to book your next brake not holiday and try out Alderney.

Not to many budget airlines go there for starters.

Not to many schedule passsenger ferries.

Not to many residents either so you could find out quickley about life on Alderney.

Have a nice weekend end or two. :ok: :ok:

[niknak]

Been to Alderney, and I'd quite happily go back there, but it was only for a week and that's no time at all to find out about what really goes on.
I guess I fell into the trap that many of us make in assuming that the Channel Islands are one when it comes to infrastructure, an easy mistake to make but I stand, very severely, corrected!:eek:

[Guern]

NikNak

Didn't mean to be severe just correct the misconception.

Update from todays Guernsey Press below. How can they reduce the loss without putting people from going there it would seem a difficult task to me.

"ALDERNEY Airport will not be developed unless another private investor comes in.
Unperturbed by the recent pull-out of millionaire ‘saviour’ Terry Holding, Public Services has announced it will seek other invitations for a public-private partnership.
The Alderney Working Party, which includes States members from both islands, met yesterday morning in Guernsey.
‘We still believe the only way in the imminent future that capital could be provided for development at Alderney Airport is through private hands – it’s very unlikely that the States of Guernsey is going to be in a position to allocate capital,’ said Public Services minister Bill Bell.
‘While Terry Holding suggested an across-the-board investment, it might well be that we have individuals and companies coming forward to develop hangars and the like separately. But we’re open to any suggestions. We’re really saying the door is open and if people have got any ideas, come and talk to us.’
In a statement issued jointly by Deputy Bell and Alderney States member John Postlethwaite, the party expressed disappointment that Mr Holding’s company, HBC, pulled the plug on a proposed £10m. investment due to public opposition.
‘The meeting noted that the master plan for Alderney Airport was about to be completed and that this would set into place an indication of how any development could be progressed,’ it added.
‘It is inevitable now that any such development will have to rely on private investment, given the severe constraints on public funding.’
The plan has been drafted and a completed report is expected in a few weeks. It will be made public and identify the best strategic use of land within the airport boundary and possible sites for future development opportunities.
‘Once the plan is finalised, invitations for private development will be sought. This method of public-private co-operation has worked successfully at Guernsey Airport over recent years, especially in respect of hangar development, and such opportunities could also exist for Alderney Airport.’
Individuals or companies with ideas are being invited to contact the Guernsey Airport director.
‘The Public Services Department remains concerned over the heavy subsidy required at Alderney Airport and will continue, in conjunction with its Alderney colleagues, to strive to find ways to reduce that subsidy. Work on additional income opportunities and controlling costs will continue as a matter of urgency.’
Alderney Airport runs at a loss of £500,000 a year and Mr Holding’s offer would have led to a new airport terminal, hangarage and a longer runway.


Published 4/3/2006"

[Aero Mad]

Hi all, any hope for more flights to/from Alderney to mainland destinations. Doubt it for the moment... you? Talk is that the States might subsidise more UK routes. But with an 880 metre runway, the 'biggies' can't do anything and so its up to Blue Islands, Aurigny, Manx2 and Loganair (erm... no.) to do something.

[Jerbourg]

Wouldn't it be great to see Flybe operating routes out of here with franchise partner Loganairs Twin Otters. I wonder...?

[RooCat]

At first glance to this idea, it seems that given the previous ventures that have been trialled from Alderney , I believe that both Aurigny and Blue Islands have trialled non inter-island flightsand settled at operating via Jersey or Geurnsey. Didn't Blue Islands operate a full channel island schedule out of Bournemouth, one route was Alderney 4x weekly, ceased in 2009. Another was Brighton Shoreham of all places??Any Logic in that?

I heard somewhere that theres a book coming out in the summer about the history of aviation on Alderney, which apparently covers upto the current time.Any use??
;)

[Wycombe]

Wouldn't it be great to see Flybe operating routes out of here with franchise partner Loganairs Twin Otters. I wonder...?

....but where would they operate it to? I guess the ACI SOU route will continue to be the main link to the mainland and... GR have had that sown up for about 40 years!

[Malthouse]

Blue Islands dropped their Bournemouth route last year, much to the disgust of the local tourism industry.

The Shoreham route was quite nice, not least of which because quite a few people come from Kent and that area; the free parking was nice too.

There is always talk of extending the runway, but with a major conference centre being proposed this is more likely to happen than not.

The major issue is that the airport is managed by Guernsey (with Alderney tax money) so there is a complex maze of bureaucracy to any changes.

As it stands does anyone know what aircraft are capable of taking up slack from the Trislander?

[dublindispatch]

Could an a/c make Alderney to say ORK or DUB? I would think an untapped market for the summer would be GCI/ALDERNEY to ORK or DUB.

[Aero Mad]

Hi all, it is me who is publishing the book this August - please PM me for more info. The Dornier 228 (good but islanders would raise eyebrows as is German) and new-build Twin Otters could take over from the Trislanders with no problems, and the up-and-coming GECI Skylander would also be ideal.

[virginblue]

AeroMad,

maybe this one would soften the blow for the islanders - the empire version of the 228:

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited - Exports - Dornier 228 (http://www.hal-india.com/exports/dornier.asp)

Looking forward to your book - who is the publisher?

[Aero Mad]

VB you're right - building under license and taking every opportunity to say 228 rather than the D word would probably work :E. Book is due out very early August with Amberley Publishing (I believe they are the fastest growing history publisher in UK). It will come to around 128 pages and is well illustrated with both colour and B&W images.

It covers the entire history of aviation in Alderney and also outlines the history of aviation in Guernsey and Jersey. There is a chapter on the Nazi occupation (1940 - 1945 as it is done in a straightforward chronological fashion) and also one on the future of the airport including Trislander replacements and possible airport expansion.

It is also available for pre-order on Ama:mad:on. Please would anyone tell me here if they order it as I like to keep track of demand. There should be a few reviews coming out soon in magazines such as Aeroplane Monthly and Aurigny's inflight magazine, En Voyage.

[shamrock7seal]

would the dash 7 be able to land there?

it landed at Bembridge isle of white and they have an 800m runway same width as ACI i believe.

if not Dash 7, cant the Dash 8-100/200 make it work? They can land on grass/gravel strips in africa etc.

[Aero Mad]

Shamrock you are right, but it has to be remembered that an island of 2400 and a smaller tourist industry than the other islands cannot economically support Dash 7s and 8s - the load factors just wouldn't work.

They struggle to fill the Trislanders at times (especially in winter) and the only time of year a Dash 8 would be nice would be at Alderney Week when the Trislanders have to do about 12 rotations a day from Southampton :). However, the Dash 8-100 would need a few 100 metres more but I'm sure you could squeeze it in in an emergency.

With regards to failing mainland air links (on the part of Blue Islands), they could have done some advertising in the Brighton area - I never recall seeing any anywhere in Sussex! This would have got them many more passengers and possibly made the route sustainable. With regards to Bournemouth, I believe there was a little more to this than met the eye as they pulled the plug on Guernsey - Bournemouth as well. Shame really.

[RooCat]

Wideroe in Norway operate off runways of 800m as part of their regular everyday situation. The shortest runway I believe is @780m. Atr, in accordance to certain specifications, can have atr 72-500's operate within 350 nm providing theres a low temperature at at sea level:bored::bored::bored:

[Aero Mad]

Yeah I knew that Widerøe operated off very short runways, but you have to bear in mind that they are operating many PSO flights so load factors can be lower, resulting in a lower aircraft weight leading to the possibility of more extensive STOL operations :).

[Flightrider]

Upgrades would be needed to fire cover and security screening at Alderney if aircraft above 20 seats were to be used. This would require very significant investment which is unlikely to be forthcoming when the airport is already suffering from such a large deficit in its finances. I don't think any operations with Dash 8-100s, 328s or anything like it is in prospect any time soon!

[Aero Mad]

That's what I was trying to say - with a short runway, little demand and higher CAT fire cover needed, what's the point? :\

[RooCat]

Wasn't blue islands attemptin to gain licensing to operate to Bristol?? I think that the routes in question did include Alderney as well as Geurnsey but I think approval wasn't given

[Aero Mad]

Have just checked the license on States of Guernsey's website and it says that Alderney was not included.

[easy]

Along with a few other pilots, I started my career instructing with Stratair, do they get a mention?:ok:

[Aero Mad]

Yes, Stratair and the Devereux House Hotel are mentioned, and I give you this section from the book about Stratair et al :ok:
But it was not just Channel Islands airlines which faced ruthless competition. In 1988, another flying club had been formed on Alderney – an alternative to the now firmly established Alderney Flying Club. Ron Wakefield, owner of the Devereux Country House Hotel in Val Fontaine had set up Stratair, and parallel company Stratair Engineering (Alderney) Ltd., as a flight training club with the advantage the pilots could have cheap accommodation. Stratair Flying School started with a Cherokee 140, Cherokee Six and a twin-engined Aztec, all built by Piper in the USA, before expanding in 1990 by adding five twin-seater Tomahawk aircraft to the fleet.
According to a visitor who stayed there, “it was great fun sharing a hotel with loads of other pilots. The gesticulations of planes doing this or that after dinner or in the bar were hilarious.” He did some training at the flying school and also remembered “seeing a Stratair instructor running down the road in the headlights of the mini-bus trying to catch a rabbit with the mini-bus full of flying students looking askance at the thought they would be flying with this nutter!” The flying school had shut by the mid 1990s.
March 1988 also saw a new flying training school being set up on Alderney alongside Stratair and the Alderney Flying Club. Sally Williamson, a qualified nurse, set up Alderney Flying Training with one Cessna 152. It was soon a regular feature for the Alderney Journal to show who had recently passed their Private Pilot’s Licences, however Alderney Flying Training had been discontinued by September 1990 in favour of Williamson, having gained enough hours, pursuing her career as a First Officer with Aurigny on its new Shorts 360 aircraft.

[Aero Mad]

FlyerGuy - I fully agree with you, but the concerns of islanders have to be taken into account, whether justified or not. I'm sure they'd get over it very soon. In any case, I suspect that Aurigny would probably consider the Skylander but probably would buy more Islanders if the Trislanders were to be phased out - or possibly just order more new-build Trislanders (B-N will restart the production line with only 3 orders).

Islanders do not mind the Germans in general, but the name Dornier probably rings quite a few bells in peoples' heads. In any case, the Trislander should still be able to be used, according to Aurigny, until AvGas becomes too expensive or unavailable.

[virginblue]

AeroMad.

Please would anyone tell me here if they order it as I like to keep track of demand.

I have just ordered my copy.

[Aero Mad]

Thank you very much - it should be with you by 10th August at the latest (if all goes well :})

[Stampe]

I,ll buy one ..hopefully the airport shop will stock it so I can pick one up when I visit for cheap fuel ??a great islandmany happy memories.

[Aero Mad]

Yeah airport shop will hopefully stock them - very likely indeed - but I've got to contact Rose & Crown Pub who run the operation :ok: but as I say, there is a 90% chance they will.

[Winniebago]

How impractical would it it be to contemplate the Cessna Caravan equipped with 12, even 14 seats with baggage pod on a PSO route? Limited to VFR of course but the operational costs are superb. No problem with field performance either.

Still no hope of SE-IMC public transport ops on the horizon?

Might actualy make money with that one.

Forget anything bigger than the Twin Otter.

[Aero Mad]

It's probably my mistake but I always thought that our friends :mad: at the CAA didn't approve of single-engined pax operations anymore? You're definetly right though, the Caravan would do a grand job :)

[Malthouse]

BBC are carrying a story that the States of Guernsey are giving serious thought to selling Aurigny to Blue Islands, operated by the Healthspan group it is easy to see that all direct flights to and from Alderney will cease and that every passenger will travel via Guernsey.

:ugh:

BBC News - Aurigny Air Services could be sold to Blue Islands (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-guernsey-10636450)

[Malthouse]

But the group that own Blue Islands prefer visitors to travel via Guernsey, I doubt the Alderney links are of much interest to them.

[jetstreamtechrecords]

Look at whats happened to BI in ACI since Healthspan took over. BOH,JER and St Brieuc all junked.

They'll kill ACI services by slow death and blame it on running out of serviceable trislanders with no replacement available. ACI-GCI-SOU. That'll be your routing for 2011.

[Aero Mad]

jetstreamtechrecords, frankly, I couldn't agree more... Coates is saying there is no obvious replacement. I saw as soon as he said this that he would use this as an excuse to pull an Alderney route. As a result, I find the prospect of a BI take over positively appalling. We need his assurance and someone needs to foil his 'cunning' plan...

[Malthouse]

The only thing I have come up with so far is to put pressure on the States to ensure Guernsey do not sell off the Aurigny brand name, without that Healthspan will not have the monopoly and all the staff that will inevitably be laid off can form a management-reforming of the airline.

Does anyone know of an Twin Otters going spare? :)

[Aero Mad]

All we need is a couple of Twotters, a couple of Islanders and a Dornier 228. As my nextdoor neighbour in Alderney told me once:

How do you become a millionaire? Become a billionaire, and start an airline :)

[Wycombe]

The chaps from Canada who make the "new" Twotter are of course at Farnborough as I write!

[Malthouse]

Momentum to object to the merger is gathering, there is a facebook page:

Say NO to Blue Islands/Aurigny merger | Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Say-NO-to-Blue-IslandsAurigny-merger/131972280172499)

[Aero Mad]

and a petition Say NO to Blue Islands/Aurigny merger (http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/saynotoblueislands/)

[Malthouse]

The Alderney Journal are quoting Derek Coates as saying there's "no chance" of Blue Islands cutting Alderney's direct link to the UK..

Hmmm, ok. :suspect:

[Aero Mad]

The following question is proposed for inclusion on Who Wants To Be a Millionaire:

Q: Why is it hard to trust Derek Coates when he says there is no chance of cutting a route?
A: Because his airline has cut 14 routes since 2001.

However, a scrutiny panel rubbished the question, deeming it far too easy.

[Malthouse]

In defense of Healthspan, they may well have no intention of closing the Southampton route. But as a business they are not known for being Alderney-centric, try booking a room at their hotel in Alderney via their reservations office in Guernsey and you will see what I mean.

None of the proposed buy-out is about Alderney, even when the States of Guernsey bought Aurigny it had nothing to to with Alderney but was to protect the Guernsey to Gatwick route. So long as Bluerigny keep that up then Guernsey will be happy.

As with all things Alderney has a 50% voice about what happens in Alderney and a 5% say when it comes to the Bailiwick. :{

[IOMspotter]

theres loads of rubbish spoke down there about no replacement for the trislanders. we have had their replacement operating up here on IOM BLK BFS for 4 years. Its called the Let 410. Not fast or pretty but a Rolls Royce compared to the trislander. We got rid of the last trislander from Ronaldsway 5 years ago when even the newspapers complained about the noise.

[Aero Mad]

and the GECI International Skylander SK-105, the Trislander (new-build!!!!), the Dornier 228 (as seen at Manx2), the LET 410 (as seen at Manx2), the Fairchild Metroliner (for Jersey - Guernsey, as seen at Manx2). What a load of BS from Coates :(

[Jerbourg]

is just goes to prove what Coates & his accountant cronies know about the airline world - Sweet FA.

[Cloud1]

Aurigny have been doing the odd day returns to Exeter this season, any reason for this? Are they testing the water with adhoc charters??

[HWY4A]

Didn't DC say that they would keep the best of the Trislander fleet to service Alderney? So why does everyone think he'll turn his back on the rock?

He also said that there was no realistic alternative to the Tris which are coming to the end of their lives. Agreed the Twotter, Do 228, Skylander, et al could operate into ACI, but how much is adding one of those types going to cost? Best guess, say £3-£4m? For an island of 2000 people. That's a lot of SOU trips.

[Malthouse]

BBC Piece here:

BBC News - 'Blue Aurigny' guarantees UK 'lifeline' flights (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-guernsey-10684347)

[Malthouse]

"Didn't DC say that they would keep the best of the Trislander fleet to service Alderney? So why does everyone think he'll turn his back on the rock?"

No one thinks he will stop all flights into Alderney, the common belief is that he will stop the Southampton - Alderney route.

In the BBC quotes as linked above he acknowledges that dropping the SOU-ACI run will kill the island, but he does not say it wont happen. Even if he did, many would not believe him.

[Aero Mad]

No, Coates did not say he would keep the cream of the Trislanders on Alderney routes (by that he means Aurigny's Trislanders - his are, shall we say, somewhat passed it). He has said numerous times he wants the Tris out by 2012, yet he has not specified a replacement.

The closest he got to that was complaining about the $4m Twin Otters. This is justifiable - but he is talking new build Viking Air 400 variants. I know of some perfectly good mid to late '80s Twin Otters that do the same job (albeit with older equipment - but the flights still happen) for way under half the price.

The reason he may pull out of Alderney (or at least ACI - SOU) is that he has not specified a replacement, indeed saying there is no obvious replacement. That's not true. Looking at his timetables over the years, ACI flights have declined and declined further. BI hasn't even scheduled any extra Alderney Week flights this year. Aurigny say THANKS VERY MUCH and bag the pax. When Aurigny's gone, the pax will have nowhere to go at this rate. Get my meaning :sad:

[Malthouse]

"... nowhere to go..."

Oh but they will very much have somewhere to go, they will be told all about how wonderful Guernsey is at this time of year. Such a shame that the customer will miss the festival in Alderney, did we mention the events list for St Peter Port?

It happens now, no reason to believe it will happen less once all the air links to the island are controlled by one company.

[HWY4A]

Aero Mad, my point was that the Tris are finished. Single crew CAT, with or without AP's, will be binned within the next 2-3 years. So, that leaves you with what to get as a replacement, as stated above. And the cost implications of this. For an island of 2000 people. Get my point? All very well slating the state of BI's a/c and that you find him untrustworthy, etc, but missing the main point of my question. I'm not for or against this buyout, I can see pro's and con's of both sides.
Oh, and if they still plan to fly to ACI from GCI after the deal is done, it would be madness not to continue onto SOU don't you think? From what I understand, that SOU route is about the only profitable one GR have. Makes them a great deal of money.

[Aero Mad]

Mind you the Alderney - Bournemouth route was reputed to be making BI money - they ran it for over a decade. Look what happened to that.

[cheeseman]

Aero Mad, my point was that the Tris are finished. Single crew CAT, with or without AP's, will be binned within the next 2-3 years.

It's much talked about, but what's your source? Have the CAA actually said this?

[atcalcatraz]

The Trislander is not the only A/c that is able to use Alderney in the public transport mode, the D228, twin otter and let410 are all able to carry maxloads. MANX2.COM flew there d228 into Alderney in 2009 in high crosswinds and landed with no problems. The Deficit in Alderney is made up from ATC/AFS saleries, which are essential sevices and add upto £550000, when you take into consideration that Alderney makes approx £250000 in income for GUERNSEY the Airport is quite healthy. The reason for this is that Guernsey have made an error in there budget for there Airport they won't spend anything in Alderney.Which includes JetA1 fuel, and so the Trislander is still in use. but for howlong we do not know, with them not conforming to modern requirements.

[Aero Mad]

Hahahaha couldn't agree more atcalcatraz, have heard IoM pilots complaining about
the amount of cr:mad:p coming out of the Channel Islands about a BN3 replacement. Try telling Coates that :ugh:

[Malthouse]

BBC News - Talks held to allay Alderney fears over UK air links (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-guernsey-10774317)

[Aero Mad]

Did you go, Malthouse? Sadly, I'm only on-island from 28th onwards :{ so missed the meeting. Any comments on Trislander replacement? He could use this as an excuse to pull out, as I've said previously.

[Malthouse]

I could not make it due to work commitments, but I am sure there will be a few pages on it in Friday's Journal.

Let me know if you would like to meet up for a beer when you are OI. :ok:

[GAMPY]

With respect, if you think Flybe would maintain ACI services then I fear you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Maybe if theACI routes were to be given PSO ststus (like some of the Scottish routes) then a limited service would be kept but I can't see the States of Guernsey subsidising ACI flights and the UK government is under no obligation whatsoever to provide a subsidy. Manx2 won't come near ACI in spite of that silly proving flight with the 228 last summer - Noel Hayes has even moved away from ACI. Blue Islands is the best option for future ACI flying if only because they own a sixty-bed hotel which needs good UK connections.

[Jerbourg]

GAMPY - it doesn't matter who flies in the residents for Coates ACI hotel, I believe the majority fly in with Aurigny at the moment & not Blue Islands. If the sale goes ahead will hotel guests still be offered "free" flights to ACI or will this vanish & with it the meagre traffic that Blue carry to the northern isle? This would result in a further drop in BI ACI traffice then would be a good reason for Coates to pull the plug. As for saying that Manx2's Do.228 flight was silly, why? I suspect sour grapes that he proved that there are other a/c types that can get into ACI apart from the Trislander...

ACI residents be afraid of Blue Islands, be very afraid.

[HWY4A]

Jerbourg, as the past 8 years of unbridled support (:=) of Le Cocqs/Rockhopper/BI from the Rock's residents has shown, who should be afraid of who?

[Malthouse]

Just watching the video of the talk, I confess to being a little wooed.

Alderney.TV (http://www.alderney.tv/)

[Aero Mad]

My book is now on the shelves in various newsagents e.t.c. around the island as well as the airport and museum :ok:

[Malthouse]

Congratulations!

My other half saw you up there yesterday. :ok:

[tin canary]

Ref the day return between Exeter and Alderney - it was a for a funeral.

[second coming]

With all this talk of a trislander replacement I have never seen the beech 1900 mentioned. Can sit 19 people and apparently can operate from short runways. Could it operate the route?

[controlx]

No - the Beech 1900, any varient, would not work. It's got to be very good on STOL performance - Twin Otter ideal, Dornier 228 with restrictions possible. Otherwise it's Trilanders, Islanders and in an ideal world Cessna Grand Caravan (208) or PC-XII if the CAA ever got their act together and permitted sinle-engine IMC commercial operations. Not going to happen for a few years yet, but one day almost a certainty once commonsense sinks in.

[second coming]

Shame, reckon it would be a good fit for the route. Don't get many Beechcraft over here too. Don't think the trislander or islander are the future, certianly drive me mad with their noise. There must be plenty of cheap small planes out there, especially sitting in the graveyards over in the US.

[SleekMover]

Commonsense has sunk in - that's why single engine IFR public transport isn't allowed.

[jetstreamtechrecords]

wake up guys. You dont want single engine into ACI. You need Do228, Let410 or skyVan (if u can find one) or Twin Otter. All can operate unrestricted on 1800m. J31/2 , Beech 1900 and Metroliners can get in but not out. Bout time you got rid of those old three engined piston jobs and went for reliable turboprops.

[second coming]

Why is it such a problem? Must be loads of do228, twin otters and let410's around. Look at manx2 for example. Why are skyvans so hard to find?

[second coming]

Just checked the skyvan out, only thing uglier than a trislander. :eek:

[five zero by ortac]

Guys, the length is 877m, it was 880m but it seems to have shrunk 3m in the last year! Unrestricted ops = twin otter. Let410 = forget it. Do228 will NOT operate off ACI unrestricted. I did a feasibility study for a new company some years ago, the Do228 only works if everything is going your way, ie dry runway, ISA, and +15kts straight down the runway. Something that doesn't happen here very often, in fact we took the previous winter's metars, plugged the numbers in, and we would have diverted 28% of the inbound flights to GCI. No use to anyone. The project died in the end because airport management refused to even consider regular Do228 flights as, and I quote, "it would breakup the tarmac". :ugh:
I do agree that ACI needs turboprops however it has to have 1200mtrs of tarmac first. The Tris are well past their sell by date - can't wait to see them go - whilst I still have a bit of hearing left. :bored:

[second coming]

Twin otter it is then. Why don't they get on with it, trislander is a nuisance!

[Malthouse]

Hold on a minute there Ortac, are you suggesting at the same time that the Twin Otter is the only option but that a quarter of all such flights would be diverted?

I am not sure that adding 1200m of runway is the only way to move past the Trislanders.

[five zero by ortac]

Hi Malthouse, no, I didn't say that. I said the Twin Otter could operate unrestricted, but a Do228 could not and would involve numerous diversions. Also I didn't say ACI needs to add 1200m to the runway, I said it needs a 1200m runway, ie extend 877m to 1200m.

[Malthouse]

Thanks for clarifying. :ok:

I guess things will change if the Tourgis development goes ahead, I doubt a convention centre will be satisfied with a dozen pax per flight.

[Aero Mad]

To quote DC in a letter he sent to me: 'You never know, there may well be a longer runway in 5 years time'. This was in the context of retiring the Tris over that period. To get past the single engine problems, all you need is the Caravan Amphibian, problem solved :}.

[jetstreamtechrecords]

five zero by ortac. Have you looked at the trislanders performance data recently in the same light as the Do228s? I think it shows the Tri has real problems getting out in the same circumstances, especially when its hot.......... Islander is OK though.

[Jerbourg]

Aeromad - Is DC hinting at his company funding a runway extension do you think? :rolleyes:

[Nubboy]

Can't remeber the exact numbers, but I recall being told that a warm day in summer, the WAT limit on an islander was below MSA for the local area. Global warming would seem to knock them firmly on the head then:ok:

[virginblue]

Do the above-mentioned limitations apply both for the D228-100 and the D228-200?

[five zero by ortac]

The study done some years ago was based on the Do228-201 with the higher MTOW. As far as I can remember the -100 was never considered.

[virginblue]

It is very difficult to find comparative data for the -100 vs. the -200, but from what I gather, the -100 apparently has a shorter take-off distance (which seems logical given the -100s lower weights - there must have been some reason why Dornier offered the -100 in the first place). However, there were only 35 or so -100s produced and the NG version is only offered for the longer -200.

[fudpucker]

When the Tri dies, ACI dies. All the alternatives you guys are talking about here have been talked about for years. Like 5b4ort I also did a study in the early 90's for somebody. The 228 was a non-started financially and probably still isn't. Turbo-diesel Tris might be the way to go but that isn't going to happen either, nor, frankly will a runway extension. Nope, the Tri dies ACI dies. Sad day, but then they'll probably keep going for years and years and years and........

[Malthouse]

The island the the Trislander are certainly closely linked, but there will be a longer runway soon enough and there will probably be an extension to the terminal. Then there might even be interest in operating aircraft larger than 19/20 pax.

But for me the Tri is perfectly suited to the island hopping role, I would love to see more of them serving more routes!

[virginblue]

Even if there is no suitable 16+seat replacement, there is always the Islander. For sure fares will have to go up with a smaller aircraft plying the routes, but the formula "no Tris no ACI" is a bit over the top, me thinks. After all, the Islander was used to start intra-CI flying in the late 1960s.

[tin canary]

If only someone at BN could look at updating the good old TRI with 300hp diesels, but they are heavier. I was watching the development of the Mistral engine with interest, but sadly that has stopped for the time being. Admittedly it was still avgas powered but compact, light and almost turbine smooth it looked really promising (see the demo video). 'Cos if they develop something to replace avgas like ethanol then it would work.
Yes, i know, all dreams - who is going to put all that money in, but you would think that with all the islanders around they would do something.

I thought i read on BN's website that they were looking at diesel replacement of the Lycoming?

[fudpucker]

Indeed it was VB. The Tri was developed at Aurigny's request, because the economics on an Islander didn't and still don't work (I flew one for Air Sarnia for a time before 'going Yellow'). That was true then and it's true now, I'm afraid. I stick by what I said, no Tri no ACI. And before any body mentions Caravans, forget it, never happen. Same for Carribou and other similar museum pieces. The harsh reality is that the routes out of Aci will not support the introduction of a new aircraft type. Even if the runway is extended (a big if, been talked about for 20 years) you still have weather related problems. Bigger/faster aircraft means higher minima (and more/close monitoring of adherence to those minima ~ my ex-colleagues will know exactly what I'm talking about :)

[virginblue]

Would that mean, for example, that Skybus is burning money on its Islander-operated LEQ-ISC route which at 31mi is pretty much like ACI-GCI (26mi)?

IMHO, no aircraft per se can be deemed "uneconomical" no matter what. Economics are defined by what income you can generate with the aircraft. So the question is how much an airline could charge. Fares would need to go up, of course, but I don't see why it would be the end of the world without the Tris. All over the world islands are connected with 8-19 seaters that are not Trislanders.

[Aero Mad]

fudpucker, IMHO, i'm not so sure. between '68 and '71, Aurigny did rather nicely with the Islander, operating inter-island as well as from '70 onwards the Southampton. And they turned profits and expanded nicely. Yes, that was 40 years ago, but the only variable is the price of fuel. safe flying, AM :E

[fudpucker]

AM. Quite true, but consider there was no opposition and a grass runway. At the first opportunity they tried to get a larger aircraft operating the route.VB; what you say is true, you could operate a Tornado as a passenger aircraft, but the ticket cost would be astronomical, wouldn't it? I would therefore say that a Tornado would make an uneconomic pax aircraft. Aurigny tried an Otter, but couldn't make it pay. Why? Operating costs were such that the ticket price had to go up or they operated at a loss. The Scillies run? There is a very short strip which requires a STOL aircraft, Otters or Islanders. Routes like that you can charge higher prices. Having lived (briefly) and operated frequently (oh those luvverly winter days with the howling crosswinds and the entertaining turbulence departing off 26) in and out of ACI for a couple of companies, I can say with certainty that the ACI-ites are very price conscious. Jack up the prices and loads will plummet. Plummeting loads= higher ticket price or go bust. Alternatively, you can charge a lower price and hope to fill the aircraft; everybody thinks it's wonderful but the net result is lower ticket prices= go bust. Seen it, done it, got the T shirt. Oh, before anybody mentions Ryanair, they have a few more seats to play around with so can offer a wide range of discounted tickets.
PS
AM, not flying now, I'm sailing. Much better if slightly slower :)

[virginblue]

Not sure that I am convinced. I don't think the situation at St. Mary's is that different. The runway may be shorter, but choices at Alderney are apparently not that much greater if even the Dornier 228 cannot make it. Why should an airline be able to charge a premium there just because it operates from a shorter runway? That does not define the willingness of the customer base to pay a certain price. What defines prices is the need to get off the island, the alternative modes of transportation, competition between airlines etc. That said, the environment at the Scillies is much more challenging as there is a competing daily ferry service on a proper ferry and a competing helicopter service.

The Skybus fare targeted at locals between St. Mary's and St. Just is 125 GBP return, whereas Aurigny between Guernsey and Alderney currently is at 88 GBP. Southampton on Aurigny is 216 GBP, Exeter on Skybus is 230-260 GBP. Not cheap, but it is not as if you could travel on Aurigny more or less for free just because of the Trislander. So will the islanders stay at home if prices go up? Maybe a few will, but because the Islander only has half the capacity, that would not make it impossible to make a service viable. If you have four Trislander flights today, you could have six Islander flights and still would have slashed capacity by a quarter.

After all, Alderney is an island. The locals may be price-conscious, but realistically, their choices are limited if they ever want to leave the island. I would agree, of course, that demand is higher in the Southwest, but three or four Islander flights a day do not seem to be impossible to fill.

[Malthouse]

But the island currently enjoys 12 flights a day, with a choice of two destinations via two operators and at a range of prices from £35.

[virginblue]

Sure.

But fudpucker is suggesting that once the Trislander goes, scheduled services from ACI will disappear completely, while my point is that services may become more expensive, less frequent and on smaller aircraft, there will still be flights, i.e. not everything depends on the Trislander.

To put things in perspective, the cheapest (round-trip-based) fare from St. Mary's to St. Just is 32,50 GBP one-way on Skybus, and there are last-minute day return fares on the BIH helicopter for as little as 25 GBP one-way.

[tin canary]

Why you say "When the Trislander goes..."
Surely while there are Islanders/Defenders being produced, they will continue?

[PeteAndre]

Has anyone any info as to how the trial of the new RNAV/GNSSS Satnav assisted approach system is progressing? I understand its fitted to one of Aurigny's Trislanders

Has anyone on this forum experienced an approach with it yet?

[Aero Mad]

GSA: EGNOS for aviation comes a step closer (http://www.gsa.europa.eu/go/news/egnos-for-aviation-comes-a-step-closer) and also
Aurigny Completes EGNOS Satellite Approach Trials with Help of Gama Engineering (http://www.eraa.org/publications/industry-news/782-aurigny-completes-egnos-satellite-approach-trials-with-help-of-gama-engineering)

[Rivet Joint]

I've never flown into Alderney but it strikes me as strange that aircraft such as the Dornier 228 could not operate the route? They operate into Lukla in Nepal which is on a sheer clift face and the runway is at a sharp gradient! Surely if it can operate there then Alderney would be a piece of cake?

[xtypeman]

Its down to cost. Yes the 228 would get in and out of ACI no problem but in the UK it would be two crew operation against the Tri which is single crew. Also no Jet A1 on Alderney also the 228 would take longer to turnround who can remember the number of rotations that the props need after shut down to ensure even cooling.

[Rivet Joint]

All good points xtypeman but just because there are a few snags doesn't mean it can't be a possibility. Again i'll use the example of Lukla in Nepal, (google it by the way if your not familiar with it) if they can get Jet A1 fuel at the top of a mountain then they should be able to at Alderney surely! I don't think there is an issue of Tris replacement, when they need replacing there should be plenty of 2nd hand dornier 228's and Twin Otters at a reasonable price. Aurigny are just going to run them into the ground in the meantime. Good ridence when they do bite the dust though!

[Flightrider]

Why should availability of JetA1 be a constraint? The 228 can comfortably round-trip fuel on SOU-ACI or GCI-ACI. And as for two pilots - there is definitely a cost, but if you weigh up the hourly DOC savings on fuel and maintenance achieved on the faster 228 versus the Trislander, I'm sure it would pay for a second pilot several times over!

[Aero Mad]

228s and Twotters are certainly a possibility in the future but given that O-540s can run on mogas, there is no reason that the Trislanders can't be kept going for some time (subject to EASA rules). xtypeman isn't saying why the Trislander can't be replaced, he is saying why it is not yet ecomically viable to replace the Trislander.

[tin canary]

Nice to have a well balanced and enlightened view from a new ppruner - Rivet Joint - don't see that spending a lot of time and effort upgrading the avionics is "running them into the ground".
And why good riddance to them - isn't that a bit harsh? They have been serving the islands for 40 years and still doing a pretty good job by the looks of things.
The GPS (Garmin 430) is in 2 a/c and the other 4 will have the latest Garmin 750 fitted - which will then be fitted to the first 2 in order to standardise the fleet.
Also in the pipeline is the fitting of an EHSI and EADI.
All of this will bring them in line with the latest regs - as i said before, hardly running them into the ground.

Some people say if you have nothing good to say then say nothing. You could try this maybe?

[Rivet Joint]

Tin Canary my post was merely 'my view' just like your post was 'your view' on my post. Maybe you should look into freedom of speech, lets face it without it then there wouldn't be such a thing as a forum :ugh:

I'm sure the tri's do a very good job but this is the 21st century and updating the avionics etc I would imagine is only taking place because its the cheap option. I say good ridence because they are a nuisance due to their speed or lack there of and noise, indeed I was woken up by one this morning :mad:

[Aero Mad]

All tin canary said was that you were 'a bit harsh' - I don't think that comes anything near to approaching a restraint of free speech.

they are a nuisance due to their speed or lack there of and noise

Frankly, that just seems fussy. I flew into ACI this evening on JOEY without issue - is twelve minutes too much for you? If so, you're welcome to foot the bill for some nice new Twotters and/or 228s... and whilst you're there, bring back some Tecnam P2012s or maybe even some Dash 7s.

[Malthouse]

Various reports coming out about the grass areas being waterlogged, lights being in the wrong place etc etc.

Upshot seems to be the crosswind limits have changed?

[Aero Mad]

Declared lengths reduced on 08/26 to 799m and width on the same runway to 18m by NOTAM. Apparently IFR flights suspended, though haven't had that confirmed. The Tris fly SVFR usually so it won't affect most flights. New (temporary?) draining system also in place, despite both grass runways being closed.

NOTAMs
Q) LFRR/QMDCH/IV/NBO /A /0/999/4942N00213W
A) EGJA
B) 14/02/04 17:30 C) 14/03/14 18:30
E) RWY 08/26 TEMP REDUCED DECLARED DISTANCES. RWY 08 TORA, TODA, ASDA AND LDA 799M. RWY 26 TORA, TODA, ASDA AND LDA 799M. EXISTING RWY THRESHOLDS REMAIN IN USE. RWY WIDTH 18M. RWY SFC ASPHALT

[Aero Mad]

Re the public meeting at the Island Hall this evening, the three men who called it haven't quite nailed down their argument. A few observations:


No formal representative of Aurigny was present.
One of the five people (out of the 120 present) who attempted to refute the arguments made was booed and silenced for being 'biased'. The argument was thus significantly one-sided.
The three men laid out the narrative that Aurigny is claiming that the Alderney routes are making losses, but they are in fact making profits - but that the routes are thus under jeopardy. But why would Aurigny wish to cut profitable routes? The argument doesn't quite add up.
They don't seem to give any sources for various assertions:

- their claim that Dornier's and RUAG's assertions that the 228 and 228NG models are suitable for quick change medevac operations are wrong.
- their claim that a lavatory will be needed on GCI-LCY (on which the type is to be used) and thus that four seats must be removed.

- their assertion that operating costs are lower on the 228 and 228NG than on the Trislander, which is now costing £500 per flying hour to maintain.

- their claim that the Alderney - Southampton route is under threat in some way.

- their claim that frequencies and thus seat capacity will be reduced (Aurigny has stated it will keep to the same frequencies as the current timetable, thus seeing a slight increase in the number of seats available).

- their fundamental assertion that Alderney routes are in fact profitable.
With all due respect to the well-meaning people involved, they seem misled. I can't for the life of me understand why, at this late stage, they are attempting to stop the States of Guernsey from spending significant quantities of money on safer, faster, quieter and more modern aircraft than the Trislander, which as a 44 year old design was the product of innovation and dynamism in its day but perhaps has seen its best days behind it.

[johnnychips]

Re the public meeting at the Island Hall this evening, the three men who called it haven't quite nailed down their argument.

Could you please elucidate what this meeting was called for, by whom and in response to what; as otherwise your post is intriguing, but indecipherable.

[Malthouse]

The public meeting was called by three residents of Alderney, who had tried to raise questions at last week's Peoples Meeting (the local government monthly public consultation forum) but who ran up against time constraints.

I did not make it to the meeting sadly, so thanks to Aero for posting his summary.

One of their concerns does however ring true for me, that of the proposed schedules. Firstly there does not seem to be any slack, so tech/wx/medi interruptions will result in regular withdrawal of flights. Secondly they seem to be suggesting that two or three a/c will be able to serve four routes, which does not seem to add up at all?

[hapzim]

Cut Alderney loose from the States owned airline. Hope they have deep pockets in the northern isle to run their own airline.

[beaufort1]

Well, the Northern Isle did form and run an airline back in 1968 (I think it was, from memory). That airline was called Aurigny. ;)

The whole question of the economics is being confused by 'smoke and mirrors'. Aurigny have claimed that they are losing £900,000 a year on the Alderney route but when challenged on this figure they remain stubbornly reticent as to how this figure is arrived at. This was mentioned in the States debate earlier this year.
http://www.gov.gg/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=88629&p=0

Word on the ground is that Aurigny want to axe the Alderney-Southampton route and move all passengers through Guernsey. This will make it near impossible for business types to visit London for example and back on the same day.

[fudpucker]

If Aurigny wanted to axe the ACI-SOU route they wouldn't be buying Dorniers, now would they? They'd simply let the Tris stagger on between ACI and GCI. The simple fact is that politically, it is impossible for Aurigny to drop the ACI-SOU route, no matter what the economics of it. By replacing the Tris with Dorniers they are not only saving themselves money--I serious doubt the DOC of a DO228 is £500ph--but they have opened up the possibility of operating other routes.
The group of enthusiasts in Alderney obviously have their own agenda but they are completely unrealistic. No existing airline in Europe would buy newly-manufactured Tris. To set up a new airline--if that is their ultimate idea--is prohibitively expensive and there are many legislative hoops to jump through. The days of the 'mom and pop' airlines are pretty much done. The infrastructure required by the various authorities simply won't make a small airline economically feasible. Alderney does not exist in some sort of bubble, they would have to comply with all existing regulations and any that come into being in the future. Not the least of the hurdles which would be getting permission for a new airline to fly into SOU. I haven't looked at a SOU SID plate for a while now, but the last time I did Tris got a 'special mention'. Too noisy.

The Tris have had their day. I fully understand nostalgia and the Islanders' affection for them but the Dornier is a vastly more capable aircraft. There has been a load of rubbish talked about how (ultimately) 3 DO228s can't replace 6 Tris, but the simple fact is that all 6 Tris are rarely serviceable at the same time. Due to increased speed, there would be absolutely no problems caused by one DO228 going tech. The morning LCY aircraft will be able to fill-in, even if flights would be delayed. That's assuming that 1 out of three Dorniers will be tech/unavailable at any given time, which in my opinion is a totally unrealistic assumption.

[Aero Mad]

Word on the ground is that Aurigny want to axe the Alderney-Southampton route and move all passengers through Guernsey. This will make it near impossible for business types to visit London for example and back on the same day.

beaufort1 you're local and should know that the Alderney rumour mill often spins in interesting directions. On this occasion it is peddling utter bilge. There is absolutely no truth in that rumour, and Aurigny's actions point to it. Why would they both investing in Dorniers (which improve the economics of the SOU by substantially more than the GCI) if they were going to chop it? You know as well as I that Aurigny's political masters would never allow it anyway. It would ruin the island, unless there were probably at least 12x daily GCI services - which would only somewhat mitigate the impact of the loss.

fudpucker is bang on the money - we no longer live in 1968 and it's important that we work with Aurigny, rather than against it. Senior figures in Aurigny are deeply irritated about how ungrateful some in Alderney seem about their attempts to maintain the level of service on both GCI and SOU. The campaign is in fact very dangerous when you consider that this plays very well in Guernsey - the politicians there ideally don't want to spend up to £18m on new aircraft, but they've voted to do so. Here lies the opportunity not to... if they hand over the keys, take Dickin Drew's £200,000pa profit figure at face value and thus provide no subsidy, this whole thing will stop being such a game and escalate very quickly.

[beaufort1]

If Aurigny wanted to axe the ACI-SOU route they wouldn't be buying Dorniers, now would they?

I don't follow.

They are halving the number of aircraft and intend to add an additional route. How long is the GCI/LCY/GCI going to take? Three hour round trip, realistically? If that is designed for business types out of Guernsey that is going to be six hours out of the day taken up just on that one route, if there is an early flight and a late flight. So for a major part of the day they are left with a couple of Dorniers to service ACI/SOU, ACI/GCI, GCI/DNR and I'm not sure what the situation is with Blue Islands and the code share agreement between JER/GCI. Add in technical problems and something has to give. I'm probably missing something, perhaps they intend to run the Tris alongside the Dorniers until they can get hold of some more Dorniers, and then withdraw the Tris.

I've already had personal experience this year of not being able to travel; this well in advance, due to lack of capacity and I know of at least one sporting event in Alderney that has had to be cancelled due to lack of seats this year. Local residents have a right to be concerned.:)

[fudpucker]

The trouble is local residents don't listen to the answers they are given. You are correct in that a LCY rotation will take about three hours in total. I'd say it would realistically be three and a quarter hours before a 228 could complete the LCY rotation then depart for ACI.

You complain about lack of capacity on the routes out of ACI. The Dorniers will provide more seats. At best the Tri can lift 16 pax, the Dornier 19...and that's on the ACI-GCI route. I believe on the ACI-SOU route a realistic load for the Tri is 14 pax plus bags. For the Dornier it will be 19 pax plus bags. My basic grasp of mathematics tells me that per sector there will be an additional 5 seats. I don't want to complicate the issue but extrapolating on a four rotation day ACI-SOU that will mean an extra 40 seats. And that's just running one Dornier. If there is occasion to run two Dorniers during the day, say for a sporting or cultural event, then EACH Dornier will give an extra 5 seats per sector on the ACI-SOU route.

In 'the good old days' Aurigny had spare Tris that they could 'throw' at Alderney when the occasion demanded. That excess capacity cost money--lot's of it--and in today's market no airline can afford to have aircraft sitting around on the off-chance that they may be needed due to unserviceability or for the relatively few times during a year when excess capacity is needed for a few days. I'm thinking of Alderney Week here. At times the effort by Aurigny resembled the Berlin airlift in its intensity. I remember 17 rotations ACI-SOU! That was on perhaps 2 days of the year. No airline can afford to have that excess capacity just sitting in the hangar...but for many years Aurigny did and were their efforts appreciated? Nope, not that I remember. In fact it seemed to be winge, winge, winge most of the time.

I'm sorry but you simply have to understand that off-Alderney, everybody else thinks you are exceptionally well served in terms of air links. I would go further, Alderney is thinking of investing in a potty scheme to build a new marina. Quite apart from the fact that, as a keen yachtsman who has extensively sailed around the Channel Islands, I don't think the demand for such a marina is there, if the links are so bad why would anybody invest in a marina? I mean, how are the yotties going to get to their boats? It would have made far more sense if over the years more investment had been put into the airport and tourist industry by local investors. Instead of that, all that has happened is there has been a continuous 'winge' from Alderney about how badly served they are. You wanted competition because Aurigny had a monopoly. You got Air sarnia. That went bust, mainly due to lack of local support but there were other reasons, I accept that. You then got Rock Hopper, as was, some years later. They pulled out of Alderney, but not before they had got a route licence for ACI-JER. Aurigny warned at the time that two airlines on the route was unsustainable but nobody listened, so Aurigny pulled off the route. Then RH/BI pulled out of the island all together. Aurigny did not reinstate the route because it didn't pay. Didn't pay means they lost money on it. I hope you're able to follow this because it really isn't rocket science.

Now you (Alderney) are being offered extra capacity and what do we hear? More wingeing and mutterings of starting yet another new airline. The cost of doing so would be prohibitive and let's face it, would give Aurigny, or rather the States of Guernsey, the perfect excuse to say 'adios'. It really is a case of being careful what you wish for because you might just get it. The airline 'game' in 2014 is completely different to what it was in 1968, or even 1998. Some of those aviation 'experts' on Alderney simply don't appear to realise that.

[beaufort1]

My basic grasp of mathematics tells me that per sector there will be an additional 5 seats.

My basic grasp of reality tells me that it doesn't matter how many seats there are on a specific aircraft, that aircraft can't be in two places at the same time. How are the Dorniers going to service the sectors mentioned? I'm not aware of this being explained in any detail in the public domain. Perhaps you can provide some details?

I remember Air Sarnia, and am aware of some of the problems, trying to run a service with one aging Islander was a little ambitious.

As for the marina plans, the current ones are a bit pie in the sky as they rely on new houses being built on the green site to generate the finance to build the marina, after reading something in the local paper it is alleged that the company proposing this development have something like £15k in the bank. Their status as preferred contractor runs out at the end of this month. I agree with you in regard to viable travel links but it has become a bit of a 'chicken and egg' situation. I disagree with you in regards to demand, I've over thirty years professional experience in the maritime industry within the Bailiwick of Guernsey and have also sailed/raced fairly extensively, from experience of the new French marinas that have been built over the last couple of decades along the Brittany coast they are all bustling places which have generated local business in terms of chandleries, restaurants and the like. As an example in Normandy, look at the amount of property built in Carteret during the last decade or so and the prices being charged for them. Geographically, Alderney is ideally placed at the crossroads for vessels cruising into the Bay of St.Malo and a protected marina would be well utilised.

[Jerbourg]

I seem to remember Air Sarnia having one Islander & Two Trislanders, I also don't see what difference there is between a then aging Islander & now very aged Trislanders!

[beaufort1]

You could well be right Jerbourg, but I only remember the islander. T'was a while ago, early 80's? Memory is not what it was.:O

EDIT : Now you say that I can vaguely remember a mainly white tri with the dark maroon livery of Air Sarnia.:)

[kcockayne]

fudpucker

100% correct !

[Ayline]

Air Sarnia had Islander G-UERN and Trislanders G-BEFP and G-SARN. Both Trislanders were white with blue lines down the side (not the same shade of blue). Going back further you had Alderney Air Ferries with 3 Islanders followed by Metropolitan Airlines with Twin Otters and then Air Camelot/Aviation West. After that was Le Cocq's Airlink which became Rockhopper and then more recently Blue Islands.

[fudpucker]

Take a look at the prices charged by French marinas and you'll see why they are busy places. If you live in the South Coast of the UK then you can take your car on the ferry to Cherbourg, stock up with still cheaper than UK supermarket wine and food , fill your car with cheaper diesel (assuming it is a diesel, of course) and still be better off than basing the boat in a marina in the S UK. What has Alderney to offer to compete with that? Zilch, frankly. At best visiting boats will stay one, perhaps two nights unless weather-bound. Sorry and all that, I quite like Alderney as a place to visit for a day and a night but any longer? Can't see it and I haven't met anybody who lives in the UK who wants to base their boat in Alderney. By all means invest in some more mooring buoys and most people agree the water taxi is reasonable value but anything else? Nah!

I don't quite follow your comment about one aircraft being in two places at once. I imagine that one Dornier will do the LCY run and one other will be allocated to ACI routes. I would guess that the LCY aircraft will then do a Dinard rotation on appropriate days. If/when all three Dorniers do arrive then that would leave one spare aircraft so I'm sorry, but for the life of me I simply cannot see what all the wingeing is about, nor can I see where there is any room for confusion. My understanding is that Aurigny have stated that rotations to SOU will not be reduced, ergo there will be more seats on offer...really, it can't be much simpler than that. Per sector, there will be five more seats on offer to SOU using the Dornier. If Aurigny cut the number of Dornier rotations to three every day, then you would still be 2 seats better off than 4 rotations in a Tri.
The figures look like this: 3 rotations = 6 sectors. 19 seats per sector =114 seats on a 3 rotation Dornier day.
A tri on 4 rotations (8 sectors) =14x8= 112
So a Dornier on 3X rotations ACI -SOU=114 seats in total
And a Tri on 4x rotations ACI-SOU=112 seats
114-112=2.
but if they maintain the current schedules then on a four-rotation day you will have 40 more seats than at present.
4x rotations in the Tri=8x14=112 seats (4 rotations = 8 sectors, remember?)
4x rotations in the Dornier= 8x19=152 seats

So bearing in mind those figures and I'm not going to apologise for so labouriously spelling them out, somebody obviously had to, what the hell are all the complaints about? You will get more seats, a faster more comfortable aircraft and for those worried about it, two pilots. I have no idea what the medivac arrangements will be, except I am certain that whatever the States say they want Aurigny to provide, Aurigny will provide. If you're worried about Aurigny having a monopoly, ask BI why they pulled out of Alderney and if you can find him, ask Brian Rayward why he sold Air Sarnia. Routes to and from Alderney can only support one carrier, and then only just!

[kcockayne]

fudpucker

100% correct, again !

We are talking about an island population of less than 2000 which is only inflated by visitors from May to August (in the main).

Plenty of scope there for a frequent shuttle service!

[beaufort1]

Thanks for the explanation, I'm not whinging, I and others I've spoken to fail to see how 6 Tri's replaced by 3 Dorniers will give better flexibility and resilience. You are still losing capacity however you dress it up, it's basic mathematics. ;) When a Dornier goes tech. there is going to be one of the routes without any cover.The Law of Sod dictates that will happen at the most inconvenient time, e.g. during Alderney Week. I heard their brand new £25m Embraer was taken out of service this week due to technical problems, right at the start of the school holidays, another example of the Law of Sod at work. I'm not Aurigny bashing, they have provided an excellent service in my opinion over the years and they certainly go the extra mile on the LGW/GCI route getting passengers back to Guernsey if there have been delays due to weather for example.
I agree with you that there is probably only enough capacity for one airline on the Alderney route, although recently I see that there is a French company advertising flights on an ad hoc basis and is based in Cherbourg I think.
I'm not sure what the arrangement will be in regard to medivacs, I think at present a Tri is based in Alderney overnight, haven't both Guernsey and Jersey recently signed a contract with a dedicated Air Ambulance based on the South coast of the UK fairly recently, Exeter possibly. I don't know how that fits in with things.

I genuinely feel sorry for you if you think Alderney is only worth a visit for a day, you probably haven't explored much further than the harbour or the main town. I wasn't envisaging UK owners basing their yachts in Alderney, that has been tried in St.Peter Port and there hasn't been a great take up, even with hugely discounted rates throughout the Winter. A sheltered marina with proper facilities makes Alderney more attractive for visitors, not everybody wants to roll all night on a swinging mooring and it can be uncomfortable with the wind in the NE.

[fudpucker]

Well you ask a reasonable question Beaufort so I'l try and answer it. The fact is that not all six Tris are available at any given time. One of the main reasons for replacing them is the amount of maintenance now required to keep them flying. Certainly you're 'losing' six aircraft and replacing them by three. That is a simple fact BUT there will still be a 'spare' aircraft once the third Dornier is sourced and in the interim the LCY aircraft will be available, although not on 'immediate readiness'.

I hope that you can see that Alderney is gaining more seats. As I said, no airline today can afford to have spare aircraft just sitting around 'in case'. That leads to bankruptcy then you have no aircraft on the routes. There might well be small charter outfits who offer flights to Alderney but running a scheduled service is something completely different... I know, I've been involved with both types of operation. Finally, there is absolutely no guarantee that a new carrier would be able to get a slot at SOU, and the ACI-SOU route really is a lifeline. Other routes have been tried but they have all been dropped due to lack of support. No company can afford to have aircraft just sitting around or flying half-full, unless of course the ticket price is based on a very low seat occupancy rate, which inevitably means very expensive tickets.

I do know Alderney quite well, I was based there for a while with Air Sarnia and transited through with Aurigny. whilst I would and have gone back for a visit, one can 'do' the island in a very short time, and that is what non-aviating but sailing friends have also told me. Off-topic so apologies, but most yotties are just passing and have a limited cruising time, so whilst Alderney is a pleasant place to visit for perhaps a day and a night, other pleasures beckon. I know all about the 'Alderney roll' and believe me, it's not just when the wind is out of the NE! A marina might tempt more to visit but it's a financial gamble and I really don't think it would pay off. I'm sure we would agree there are other things that the money could be better spent on...improving the runway for one thing.

[Jerbourg]

Alderney are not losing six Trislanders as not all six were purely for ACI services anyway. Two at least were dedicated to GCI-JER and are now no longer needed due to the Aurigny code share with SI. It seems to me that Alderney are lucky to have the services they do have, given the dwindling island population.

[cobopete]

Well said Jerbourg........also needs saying that one or two tris were in the hanger being worked on so never more than 2dedicated to ACI.

[LN-KGL]

For Alderney it's more a question if it was the hen or the egg that came first. Demografically Alderney had in the 2013 census only half as many 0-14 year old compared with the UK average in 2011 and almost twice as many 65+. Looking deeper in to the Alderney census it is very clear that families with children have moved from the island since the turn of the century and left behind an even older population. I'm guessing you will the same happening to the other Channel Islands as well as for the Isles of Scilly and may be other more and less remote islands up along the west coast of Britain.

Is it higher demand for travel that is not met or has it become that more difficult to earn enough money to maintain a good life at such a remote location the last years?

[cobopete]

LN-KGL - re your question regarding maintaining the good life and hence ability to support air travel.....figures for GDP for Dec 2013 show:

Jersey 57000 dollars 7th in world
Norway 54200 dollars 9th
USA. 49000 dollars 12th
Guernsey 44600 dollars 14th
UK. 36600 dollars 34th

I think we need to look elsewhere for an explanation

[beaufort1]

I was nearly :rolleyes: correct in my recollection of the colour scheme of Air Sarnia, it was the islander that had the maroon trim. I still have absolutely no recollection of the tri's though. :O

I agree with the statement that the SOU/ACI is a lifeline and I think that is what is concerning local residents and why approx. 7.5% of the population turned out for the meeting last week. I didn't make the meeting as I had something else on unfortunately. It has been reported in the local press and there is genuine concern about this link being lost.

According to one article I've read the cost of a new tri is half the cost of one of the Dornier's and the overall running costs are also a lot less. The CAA and the European Authority have agreed the new tri's meet the necessary requirements. People are just wondering at some of the reasoning. I've been accused along with other residents of not listening but so far nobody can/will provide us with a breakdown of the £900,000 loss a year the Alderney route is allegedly costing.

Jerbourg where did I say Alderney were losing six tri's? :confused: I didn't, having six overall gives you greater flexibility and resilience throughout all your routes. Not all three Dorniers will be used on the Alderney route either; not with the GCI/LCY and the GCI/DIN route having to be serviced.

fudpucker No, sorry, I still can't see how replacing six available aircraft in your fleet with three gives a greater seating capacity. The Dornier will also have to have maintenance and will also have to be taken out of service.
There is drainage work being completed on the grass runway at present. I think in the region of £180k was spent on this work after the heavy rainfall last winter meant the grass runway being closed.
I don't remember there being any objection in regard to aged aircraft when Air UK were using the geriatric Fk27's and Guernsey Airlines using the Viscounts.
The marina should be built by the States, look at the QEII marina in St. Peter Port, don't tell the mooring holders but they have effectively paid for the marina and the QEII car park many times over, and the East arm pontoon provides a useful spill over for larger visiting craft, and is a good source of extra revenue.

In regard to a dwindling population there are steps being taken locally (See here:Living Islands initiative | Alderney ? The Channel Island (http://www.visitalderney.com/alderney/community/) ) we have all just endured the biggest recession since the 1930's, property sales are reputed to be slowly picking up though, and the island seems noticeably busier; speaking with local builders/trades they are all saying there is more work around.
I wonder also at what has changed re some of the routes no longer with us and why they are no longer profitable? The populations of both Guernsey and Jersey have increased since the introduction and axing of routes to Cherbourg and the Dinard route cut back. Cherbourg has a significant population and I would think second home ownership in France is as popular amongst CI residents as ever despite the efforts of the French Government with recent tax developments. Speaking of routes, the rot in regards to numbers dwindling on the SOU/ACI leg seems to be halting and I think there was a small increase reported in the first few months of this year.

Demographics and work practices are constantly changing. The census carried out in April 2013 revealed there were 1900 of us living here. Perhaps with the advent of the internet and video conferencing people no longer need to travel as much for the purposes of business, who knows. All the Channel Islands are feeling the pinch in regard to tourist numbers, in part due no doubt to the low cost airlines and destinations to warmer climes, although saying that Jersey are reporting better numbers this season, and is it coincidence that Easy jet are now flying there? :)

[tripin]

I fail to understand how some people feel they are owed a service and demand how many aircraft service there route. Aurigny ran 3 aircraft on the jersey route 2 flying daily plus spare /maintenance. also for the last 2-3 years 2 have serviced alderney daily with 1 maintenance/ spare. now the Jersey route is closed only 3 are needed , if these are replaced with the 228 the service will be increased. and the probability is for london city to be on ATR 72s . the only problem is there will be less capability to up the flights for alderney week as jerseys spare aircraft wont be there in the future, but one cant demand aircraft are kept spare all year just to cover 1 -2 weeks peak.
the Trislander has done its time and given good service i havent heard one CURENT tris pilot wish to keep it the 228 has major performance advantages over the trislander that lead to major safety increases. roll on the future.

[Malthouse]

I fail to understand why a community should not show interest in the monopoly that provides their air links, neither businesses nor politicians are especially trustworthy and questioning both seems prudent.

Like many I do not care what aircraft are used, just so long as the two (once three) routes remain.

Why would airline bosses get "upset" at having their plans scrutinised.

[davidjohnson6]

It is entirely reasonable for the residents of a small island to take interest in the future plans of a primary transport provider.
However, airline bosses are not politicians and can ultimately serve only one master. If the priorities set by politicians are not to the liking of a section of the population, you end up with airline bosses having to start playing political games and enter popularity contests to keep their jobs. If Aurigny as a publicly owned carrier doesn't do the population's bidding, then politicians must bear some responsibility in setting overall priorities for the airline.

[Malthouse]

Press release from the States of Alderney today:

"The Committee on 22 July met with Mark Darby, Chief Executive of Aurigny to discuss the latest plans for the Alderney routes. States Members had previously met with Messrs Drew, Cadoret and Harrisson to hear their own proposals which were discussed at some length.

A wide number of issues were discussed including the current delivery schedule for the replacement Dornier aircraft, frequency of flights and numbers of seats on both Alderney routes. Categoric assurances were given that there is no intention to terminate the Southampton-Alderney route or reduce available seats on the route. It is accepted that pricing is a concern to many people living on Alderney and those having homes here, but ultimately it was acknowledged that any significant reduction of fares will have to involve the States of Guernsey.

Neil Harvey, Chair of the Business Development and Tourism Committee said ‘We will seek a Public Service Obligation with the States of Guernsey and Aurigny to achieve this later this year as part of a package of measures to assist Alderney’s economic recovery. Aurigny has agreed to provide us with the detailed operating figures for the Alderney routes and we welcome this transparency as a contribution to this development.’

In the meantime States Members wish to express their support of Aurigny’s decision to acquire Dornier 228 aircraft to operate our routes in the expectation that these will provide a faster, more comfortable and more sustainable service to Southampton and Guernsey. Mr Harvey said ‘The contribution of the iconic Trislanders to the island and its population over many years is fully acknowledged, as is the interest and hard work of those proposing their retention. However, both States of Guernsey and Alderney as well as Aurigny agree that retention of the existing fleet is no longer sustainable and it is time to move forward as we seek to improve the island’s economy and attractiveness for inwards investment. We hope the first Dornier will be with us soon, and whilst the replacement programme will take longer than originally anticipated, we remain convinced that this is the best long term solution for the island’.

Policy and Finance Committee endorsed the unanimous decision taken in May by the States of Guernsey to facilitate acquisition of Dorniers."

[fudpucker]

It's not a question of being 'upset' at having plans scrutinised nor is it a question of ignoring peoples' legitimate interests/concerns about the service they receive.
I think what it is is boredom. Questions are answered but apparently that isn't good enough. After several attempts at trying to explain about capacity, I know exactly how they feel.

[Aero Mad]

The letter from Mark Darby to Mike Harrisson circulated with the press release was quite a read. Amongst other gems:

We are very disappointed and somewhat alarmed that you have been seeking to ‘whip up’ hysteria in Alderney based on such a flimsy appreciation of the requirements...



You glibly suggest that we should also transfer air crew and ground staff to you. Having tested the idea with a number of them, your suggestion would not be welcomed

I am sure that the majority of Alderney’s residents will be reassured that Aurigny has no intention of handing over the Alderney lifeline services to you and your colleagues.
PM if you'd like it forwarded.

[fudpucker]

So the big alternative plan was for Aurigny to transfer staff to an as yet unformed airline was it? Well I admire Harrisson's cheek if not his grasp on reality.
I think if the letter is in general circulation then you should put it up here.

[Aero Mad]

As requested. The following response from Mark Darby to Mike Harrisson - he agreed it should be circulated - accompanied a Press Release. Sent round by by Neil Harvey, Chairman, Business Development, Tourism and Marketing Committee.

Mr Michael Harrison
The White House
Cotil de Val
Alderney
GY9 3X

23rd July, 2014

Dear Mr Harrison,

Your letter dated 21st July, 2014

Thank you for your letter. To be frank, I’m not sure where to start with my reply as there appear to be so many gaps in the logic of your proposal or your understanding of what it takes to run an airline.

We are very disappointed and somewhat alarmed that you have been seeking to ‘whip up’ hysteria in Alderney based on such a flimsy appreciation of the requirements; stating as fact that Aurigny will be seeking to cancel the Alderney-Southampton route and raise prices (not true); and not presenting any cogent arguments as to why you and your colleagues would do a better job of running the Alderney services than Aurigny.

One of the key shareholder objectives for Aurigny, set by T&R, is to protect the lifeline routes to/from Alderney (as well as Gatwick). The reason that Aurigny is owned by the States is to ensure this through direct ownership and control. Flybe’s recent withdrawal from the Gatwick route vindicated this position. The same is true of the Alderney operation. Over the years, airlines have tried to make a go of the Alderney route (most recently ‘Rockhopper’). When they have failed, Aurigny has been there to ensure security of service.

You will need to test this with T&R, but I am certain that they will not view your proposal as offering a credible, secure service to the Alderney Community that will not run a high risk of failure. Should Aurigny dismantle its infrastructure that support its Alderney services, Alderney would be left extremely exposed. I do not believe that this would be in the best interests of the community.

Yesterday we attended the States of Alderney meeting. We left the meeting with a clear impression that they were not supportive of your proposals.

Your proposals

In brief, you and your colleagues seem to have overlooked some critical requirements and ingredients that would make your proposal credible. Having been involved in starting several airlines in my career I feel I can offer a fairly well informed perspective on this.

Firstly there is no description of any benefit that would accrue from your proposal – other than that Aurigny would have realised £4 from the sale of the aircraft. Surprisingly you also fail to mention the major benefit to Aurigny – a reduction in its losses of £900,000 p.a..
Further, there is:


No business plan

Revenue model
Cost model



Your financial assessment provided thus far of our “£200k p.a. profitability” suggests that you should acquaint yourselves more fully with modern airline economics before this is prepared.


No indication that you would be able to satisfy the CAA’s ‘financial fitness’ requirements
An erroneous assumption that Aurigny’s AOC could be transferred. It cannot. You would need to apply to the CAA/EASA for a new AOC, presenting a whole host of operational and financial data. You would also need to propose appropriately experienced and qualified ‘post holders’, acceptable to the CAA/EASA and demonstrate that you could establish a professional airline operation.

Other facts that you should consider:


We have been previously advised by Britten Norman when trying to sell the Trislanders that the maintenance programme that Aurigny operates the Trislanders under is unique to Aurigny and is not transferrable with the aircraft (the last such an enquiry yielded no response from BN). In short this means that when the aircraft leave the Aurigny operation, the aircraft would revert to B-N’s standard maintenance programme and normal structural lives would apply.



You glibly suggest that we should also transfer air crew and ground staff to you. Having tested the idea with a number of them, your suggestion would not be welcomed!
The Aurigny brand is not for sale.

I could go on. By all means approach T&R but as far as Aurigny is concerned, I am sure that the majority of Alderney’s residents will be reassured that Aurigny has no intention of handing over the Alderney lifeline services to you and your colleagues.

Yours sincerely,

Mark Darby
Chief Executive Officer

p.s. On a personal note, I have been informed that some statements were made against me personally during your meeting on the 15th of July were potentially slanderous. I will be carefully reviewing the DVD of the meeting.

[fudpucker]

Thank you for posting the letter. I think it answers all the questions that most people on Alderney would think of asking and many that they wouldn't know about, namely the various hoops that have to be jumped through to start an airline. Doubtless that will not prevent a few from continuing to talk a load of rubbish but that is their prerogative. Just as long as the majority of Alderney folk do appreciate that it is a load of rubbish and potentially very damaging to the Island. The danger is (very unlikely) that the States just say 'OK, enough, you go your own way'.

[virginblue]

Whoaa, the letter is quite a read. Someone is seriously p***ed (quite understandably so!)

[Malthouse]

Would there be any merit to Manx2 running a IOM to Alderney route once a week? Only asking as I have some customers want to get from one to the other and the current solution is a bit patchy!

[kcockayne]

I don't know the finer points of air travel to/from Alderney; but with a population of less than 2000 & no apparent economic links between the two islands, I can't see any likelihood of an air service between the two islands.

[Wycombe]

One could of course have done it via SOU with 1 stop whilst Flybe ran an IOM service from there.

[Aero Mad]

Below is Aurigny's planned timetable for 2015, with 2014 comparisons in brackets. Given big variables of late July/early August due to Alderney Week, schedules change from day-to-day so only indicated are average and maximum decreases. Back of an envelope sums suggest 1900 seat reduction on last year's schedule. Notable is the big contraction in late July services (bringing visitors in for AW) - it's possible that these services are to be added later.

June:



GCI-ACI



4x daily Mon-Weds (down 2x)
5x daily Thurs-Fri (down 1x)
3x daily on Sat-Sun as of 29 March (down 1x+)



SOU-ACI



3x daily Mon-Fri (no change)
2x daily Sat (no change)
3x daily Sun (no change)

July:


GCI-ACI



As above (down 2x daily Mon-Weds, 1x daily Thurs-Fri)
4x daily Sat-Sun (down 1x+)



SOU-ACI



3x daily, to 4x daily from Sat 18 Jul (as 2014 Mon-Thurs, down 2x on Fris, down avg 3x at end of month; max -5x)

August



GCI-ACI



6x daily Mon-Thurs (down 1x)
5x daily on Fri (no change/down 1x)
7x daily on Sat (up 1x)
6x daily on Sun (down 1x)



SOU-ACI



4x daily Mon-Fri (down 1x)
6x daily Sat-Sun (down avg 2x; max -4x)

[xtypeman]

Another factor that compensates for 1 less service is the increase in capacity. The Tris are booked to 14 whereas the DO 228 is 18 seat.

[cobopete]

Nest have installed a cam overlooking the apron. Dornier on stand at mo.
Find at Nest.gg [URL="http://www.nest.gg[/URL]
Good on them!
Pete

[kar42]

Full address that brings up all webcams for Nest (no link on home page)

Nest - Guernsey Webcams (http://www.nest.gg/webcams/webcam.html)

[cobopete]

Hi Kar
The link is provided on the webpage, just scroll down and is approx #6 under "useful links" listing on LH column of page. You providing direct link is useful addition though - I'll have to find out how to do that!
Thanks
Pete

[rob39]

Interesting news that potentially Citywing could be heading to the Channel Islands
Alderney's States could set-up own airline - ITV News (http://www.itv.com/news/channel/story/2015-03-23/alderneys-states-could-set-up-own-airline/)

Alderney to look into running its own airline « Guernsey Press (http://guernseypress.com/news/2015/03/24/alderney-to-look-into-running-its-own-airline/)

[rob39]

Isle of Man's Citywing proposes Alderney flights - ch-aviation.com (http://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/36185-isle-of-mans-citywing-proposes-alderney-flights)

[Rivet Joint]

Hope this takes off. The way Aurigny have dragged their heels is nothing short of scandalous.

[kcockayne]

If this goes through it'll spell the end of AUR in Alderney. Alternatively City Line won't last long. With 2000 inhabitants there's no way 2 airlines can prosper, or operate at the promised frequencies (AUR's existing one & City Lines' projected one)!

[Malthouse]

I would like to think they wont be allowed to compete on Aurigny's existing routes (CGI & SOU).

Maybe they can make it pay over the other options, but equally Aurigny are entitled to the same (formal*) subsidy.

* There is a figure often bandied about that Alderney's air links cost the Government £900k, but no one seems to want to make that an actual subsidy.

[five zero by ortac]

What a mess !

Firstly, I unfortunately have to agree that there is no room for two airlines on the same routes - well, not for them to survive.

But Alderney now has a major problem. Lets look at a few facts....
1. Aurigny's attempted transition to Dorniers has been an unmitigated disaster. Not because its the wrong type, just the way Aurigny have gone about it.
2. As you will see from the new summer schedule for Alderney services, Aurigny is no longer offering a workable service to Alderney. Large cut-backs so they only need one crew per Dornier per day. No chance of getting to Jersey and back without two night stops in Guernsey! No means of getting back from LGW after 11:30. Incoming mail will miss the retimed morning flight. I could go on.
3. We have a States of Alderney that seems incapable of getting a minimum level of service agreement in place. (or, it is Aurigny that won't respond ?)
4. And, we have the States of Guernsey that are not interested in Alderney and couldn't care less.
5. Then there has been 18 months of Trislander tech' problems. Delays and cancellations galore.
6. Aurigny is owned and subsidised (through taxation) by the tax payers of Guernsey and Alderney.

I have always been an Aurigny supporter, until now. Enough is Enough. So come on Aurigny, provide a proper service or let someone else do it.

As for the £900,000 loss on Alderney routes. This includes substantial amounts being re-charged across the network, and in Alderney's case often unfairly. We don't have a 122 seater. Lets just say, if it wasn't for the Alderney routes, the Guernsey to UK routes would be making an even bigger loss.

So, where does Alderney go from here ?

[Malthouse]

7. Airlinks Pressure Group, who's pressure has not helped move the situation forward as far as I can see.

[Flightrider]

It does rather sound as though Citywing is an airline (and I use that term loosely) in search of a subsidy. They have been seeking to raise new capital over the few months, but now have latched onto both possibilities in Alderney and Derry (using the Route Development Fund) to try to find some new subsidised routes to replace the loss of the Welsh PSO. It's not a show of strength for their core business if they are essentially becoming subsidy junkies. One hopes that a degree of due diligence is carried out before parting with any public funds in this direction.

[Cyrano]

It does rather sound as though Citywing is an airline (and I use that term loosely) in search of a subsidy. They have been seeking to raise new capital over the few months, but now have latched onto both possibilities in Alderney and Derry (using the Route Development Fund) to try to find some new subsidised routes to replace the loss of the Welsh PSO. It's not a show of strength for their core business if they are essentially becoming subsidy junkies. One hopes that a degree of due diligence is carried out before parting with any public funds in this direction.

I couldn't agree more. A few months ago on another thread here, someone suggested that Citywing might be a candidate for a Cork-Belfast service. I take the liberty of repeating my comment at the time (http://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/518363-citywing-2.html#post8739717):

Read the accident report (http://www.aaiu.ie/node/621) from the last time Citywing (then called Manx2) flew from Belfast to Cork. Six people died as a result of a chain of events to which a near-total lack of oversight - or indeed operational management competence - on the part of both Citywing/Manx2 and the Spanish subcontractor were significant contributors. I (and probably quite a lot of other people in Ireland) would not trust Citywing/Manx2 to fly a kite on the beach, let alone a scheduled passenger service, and IMHO the sooner the CAA amends the ATOL regulations to eliminate this "sub-20-seat" loophole which shamefully allows them to stay in operation, the better. Let them stay far away from Belfast-Cork, and RIP those who lost their lives.

(For the avoidance of doubt: I am not casting any aspersions whatsoever on Links Air, who are a reputable airline (=AOC holder) which does some flying for Citywing/Manx2 among other business. My gripe is with pretend airlines who are unable to provide the level of safety oversight a passenger is entitled to expect from a real airline.)

I have no link to Citywing or to any related (or competing) business and I have no direct opinion on the best solution for Alderney air service. However I find it shameful that a front company like Citywing/Manx2 can masquerade as an UK airline without providing the protection or safety oversight to which a customer assumes they are entitled.

[Aero Mad]

I think it's in the public interest that this report is more widely available, so you can now view it here (http://1drv.ms/1OMVYV3).

A few thoughts - I can't help but think they've got some numbers wrong... for instance, tucked away is a cheeky plan for an entirely new taxpayer-funded route to Cherbourg, which the report projects will carry 152 passengers in February over 8 block hours in total. Assuming just under 1.5 hours per return flight, that's a 100% load factor on a 19 seater aircraft (or 200% if they're only talking about one-way pax)... and that is definitely not right. If it could do that, then Aurigny would still run it (it was tried, several times, when about twice as many people flew into ACI as they do now). So either way the numbers need serious scrutiny. Same for the proposed Jersey route.

Likewise, why should their passenger tax bill be nearly £150k higher (£669k compared to GR's £525k) if they expect to carry only 1000 more pax? They similarly expect their Eurocontrol/nav bill to be more than doubled (up £68k) despite only increasing movements by 1.6%pa?

They expect to be able to charge higher average fares (thanks to ancillary charges for baggage and booking changes of an avg of £6 per passenger) without affecting passenger numbers at all - and project a slight increase. Straightforward economics of price elasticity of demand, coupled with Alderney's very own experience of increasing air fares, would suggest this is optimistic at least.

More widely, the notion that you can fly a dedicated 19 seater turboprop on a 45 minute hop across the Channel, with massive seasonal variations in demand and incredibly poor airframe utilisation for five months of the year, 365 days a year, with higher fares than at present and expect to make a profit of £10,755 on the route seems bizarre. I don't know of any other airline in the world which can run such an operation profitable with the projected cost base, but it begs the question as to why it requires a subsidy.

A 26% utilisation rate is projected for the month of April. The fact that it's down on Feb, when their projected demand is up 32%, sums up the extent to which these 'costings' need serious scrutiny.

We had a report last year saying the Dorniers might bring the service into profit - just possibly. But here you've got a load of funky numbers and a minimum charge to the States of Alderney for £240k/pa, with projected load factors down substantially on the existing operation. Bearing in mind that this report compares the proposed Citywing operation with the current Trislander operation, and not of the future (cost-saving) Dornier regime, I don't really see what they're getting at. Coupled with the removal of the onus to provide air services on the States of Guernsey, the commercial risks of contracting a third party with annual subsidy levels capped on lower bounds rather than at a maximum, it all looks like it needs a lot of work.

[kcockayne]

AeroMad

Says it like it IS !

[Flightrider]

Would it be a statement of the bleeding obvious to suggest that the reason Citywing's proposal is showing a profit on Southampton yet Aurigny shows a big loss is due to the Citywing average fare assumption being horribly over optimistic?

[kcockayne]

I see that Citywing have announced that their service is dependent on AUR stopping their service to/from Alderney.
What Alderney has to decide is; who can they rely on more, AUR or Citywing?
It may be unfortunate for the island (& those wanting to see the end of AUR), but the answer to that question HAS to be AUR.

[Malthouse]

Have you got a link to that?

Awarding a monopoly to a high risk operator would be a nightmare...

[kcockayne]

Malthouse

It's been on Channel TV, BBC C.I., Guernsey Evening Press & Jersey Evening Post.
They all have their own websites.

[Malthouse]

I must have missed them all mentioning the part where Citiwing demand a monopoy!

[kcockayne]

Look again at channelonline.tv (under Guernsey news).

[five zero by ortac]

I don't think its that anyone wants to get rid of Aurigny - what the island of Alderney needs is an air service that works for the island and is reliable. Something we are not getting.

Changing to a 'ticket-office' is not going to work in the long term.

[Avnu]

Just how restricted is Alderney's runway? Could a Fokker 50 operate (with no or limited weight restrictions) from there? Or is that already too big?

[kcockayne]

five zero by ortac

Citywing want to get rid of AUR !

avnu

Runway is too short & too narrow for a FK50.

[tibbs87]

Just how restricted is Alderney's runway? Could a Fokker 50 operate (with no or limited weight restrictions) from there? Or is that already too big?

Alderney's main runway is 877m x 18m asphalted. It could possibly take a Dash 7 or Dash 8-100/200 series.

Full details on NATS - NATS | AIS - Home (http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/public/index.php%3Foption=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=13&Itemid=62.html)

[kcockayne]

tibbs87

Who's got them, or would buy them for an Alderney operation ?

[Aero Mad]

Here's the link.

Alderney-based airline won't compete with Aurigny | Channel - ITV News (http://www.itv.com/news/channel/update/2015-04-01/alderney-based-airline-wont-compete-with-aurigny/)

Citywing want sole operator rights to operate a subsidised service out of Alderney. Cynics would say that is exactly the position Aurigny finds itself in at the moment, but a de facto subsidy for the latter is to a States-owned company - not to a private entity based in another jurisdiction. The fact remains that subsidising both would be an egregious waste of taxpayers' money given the size of the market.

Aside from its flaws which I did to death in an earlier post on the previous page, if this plan did come to fruition it would be on the basis that Aurigny phased out its Trislander fleet, saved considerable cost to its bottom line by not having to consider their replacements and the States of Alderney (we assume) funded one subsidised operator of air services to its own island. One might speculate that there are some in Guernsey's Treasury and at Aurigny who would be greatful for the opportunity to hang up what they might see as their moaning millstone. Mark Darby's letter to the so-called 'Alderney Pressure Group' last year, published on this forum, displayed more than a little of this temperament, with the differerence that the CAA would never have given its assent to their plans, whereas Citywing's are at least not illegal.

[kcockayne]

AeroMad

Said it like it IS, again !.

[Cyrano]

BBC reports Citywing airline asked to run Alderney-Jersey route (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-guernsey-32335869):

Citywing has been asked to fly between Alderney and Jersey under proposals from the States of Alderney.

...

The Policy and Finance Committee agreed to invite Citywing to operate a seasonal service as it discussed four transport proposals.

A spokesman said reopening the part-time route could generate summer trade without conflicting with services.

...

[fudpucker]

Having previously flown aircraft on that route I would say that it would be totally unprofitable. By the by, what's the PCN for ACI? Last time I looked it didn't have one, which would rule out such aircraft as a DH8-100.

[kcockayne]

There is not enough business there to interest any airline (as a sole route in & out of 'JA). Unless, there is a subsidy to be had !

[Malthouse]

A trislander was chartered by the States of Alderney to do the ACI-JCI route for five weeks a while back, it showed a profit.

Bear in mind that Alderney people pay a similar fare to get to Jersey as they do Southampton (70-90 each way), if an operator cannot make a profit at that for a 20 minute flight I would be shocked.

[kcockayne]

Point we'll made, & accepted. But, both AUR & BCI abandoned the route prior to that; which says something about the profitability !
Perhaps it is one thing to operate a locally based BN3 & quite another to operate a more sophisticated aircraft which has to be flown in to 'JA from quite a long way away (& then flown back to base).
This is what would have to happen if Citywing were to be the operator of this service; which, I presume, would not be daily but, even if it was, the aircraft would either be left doing nothing for the rest of the day or have to be flown back to the UK to be utilized elsewhere. Because, I cannot imagine that there would be more than 2 services per day on this route (even 1 per day would be pushing it, in my opinion).
What are we talking about ? 1 service per day equals 20 seats in each direction ie 40 pax capacity. 2 per day = 80. With Alderney's population of 2000 & demand from Jersey likely to be very small - less than 10 per day ?, even with sky high fares I don't see a highly profitable enterprise here.

[Malthouse]

The Alderney - Jersey route is a little more political than it is financial.

The route was operated for many years, by various airlines and incarnations of airlines. Remember Rockhopper, as it was then?

Aurigny pulled out of the route saying, and reiterating to this day, that they would never return to it. How much Guernsey (island of not Bailiwick) government influence that decision by wanting Alderney's travellers to go via GCI, ideally over night, has influenced that position can only be guessed at.

We all know that the Bailiwick's population is shrinking, which does suggest that subsidies are needed for transport. But that is hardly new is it, the amount and accessibility of the subsidy are harder to pin down though.

As far as Alderney tourism, Jersey is a much richer marketing ground than Guernsey. Both in terms of Jersey residents, many of whom have links/fondness/desire for what Alderney has to offer, but also in terms of visitors accessing the islands via the largest island's air links.

Add to that the base of business, with numerous people in Alderney travelling to Jersey regularly and the ones who would but cannot afford to wait three hours in Guernsey.

How many seats a day this equates to is hard to define, but the demand is there for sure and in both directions.

You are quite right of course, flying in an empty aircraft from a distant base of operations is madness. I would rather charter an Aurigny aircraft, but the notional 4 Tris and 3 Dornis are yet to be made real.

[kcockayne]

Malthouse

I read your views/information with interest. You are perfectly correct when you raise the political dimension; & this is, I believe, a politically motivated idea (Jersey service).
I accept your points as factual, although I feel that they are tinged with a little optimism. I would like to see such a service happen; & survive, &, if the political will is there then it may well do so (with a possible subsidy). I still have doubts on the demand from only a 2000 population & ( as a Jersey resident who worked in Jersey ATC for 30 years, & as someone who loves Alderney) I still don't think that there is enough demand from Jersey to sustain this service.
As a C.I. Resident for 65 years, I am well aware of the sometimes unrealistic aspirations of the local politicians & have seen a number of ideas (most not very well thought out) come to nothing over the years. I hope that this idea is more successful than those others. Time will tell !

[five zero by ortac]

Back in my days at Aurigny, the ACI-JER route was very successful, twice a day service, and carried about 60% of ACI-GCI pax numbers. Sorry can't remember the numbers.

There was then a change in management and AUR went regional from GCI. What followed was, in my opinion, a deliberate move to get pax to/from ACI to go via GCI and use their regional UK services. The JER route was cut to one a day, and at a time (late morning) that was of no use to anyone, pax numbers collapsed overnight, and then the route was quickly dropped.

Rockhopper/Blue Islands came along and thought they could do better. They did fairly well in the first year but their eyes were really on the ACI-GCI cream.

The States of Alderney then made a massive mistake by granting BCI the ACI-GCI licence in competition with AUR without linking it to a condition of maintaining the JER route. No guesses what happened next.

BCI then did a period of ACI-JER fares but routing via GCI, which was better than nothing. The transfer in GCI was only 15 minutes, so no big deal. A bit different to AUR's 5 hour wait now !!

So yes, there is a market for ACI-JER provided the timings are suitable for business people, connecting to UK services ex JER, and shoppers.

[kcockayne]

Five zero by ortac

We'll, you live there & have plenty of knowledge & experience of Alderney air services, so I accept what you say (& agree with pretty much all of it).
As I say, I would like to see this route opened again, & maintained. So,let's hope that you're right.

[Aero Mad]

five zero by ortac, just curious but now GR has a substantially higher avg load factor on its GCI-UK regional services than it once did, given the substantially reduced yield available from ACI passengers tranferring (evident from the breakdown of any such booking) would it really be in GR's commercial interest to try and shoe-horn them through GCI? There have been many occasions when I've travelled ACI-LGW and noted that I'm paying upwards of 50 per cent less booking on that route rather than on a comparable GCI-LGW direct booking made on the same day.

Re the demise of ACI-JER, you suggest that GR sought to end it on purpose. The following was my own reading of the demise of ACI-JER - is this not correct? Rockhopper was granted a license to commence operations on the route in late 2003 and Aurigny terminated its flights from Alderney to Jersey in early October 2004, citing the shrinking of the market from 9,356 passengers in 2003 to 4,687 passengers in 2004 and what it saw as unsustainable competition which would not have been incurred had it been the sole operator. Rockhopper cut the route in early 2005; only 54 passengers were carried between the two islands that year. Under new management, Blue Islands made seasonal returns for some of the summer months to the route from 2006 until 2009, when it stopped.

[Malthouse]

The local paper has run a small piece about the prospect of Citiwings running a Alderney-Jersey route, they report that there are already running a Gloucester route into Jersey.

[kcockayne]

Yes, they are. Twice a week.

[Malthouse]

So not impossible for them to fit in something like...

IoM - Glos - Jer - Alderney - Jer - Glos - IoM? It would just mean moving their return flights from Jersey back an hour or maybe less.

Or Add ACI in on the Glos - Jer route perhaps. But I am guessing their IoM - Jersey pax would be vexed by two stops in their journey.

I had a quick look at their site for June and they only look to be doing Saturdays. No bad thing at all from an Alderney perspective, though the article said the States of Alderney would like two week to bracket the weekend. Presumably they are thinking Fri afternoon and Sunday afternoon are ideal.

[kcockayne]

Yes, possible. But I thought that the requirement was for something a bit more frequent.

[Malthouse]

Twice a week, May to September. So the article reports.

I just hope they are offering a subsidy per passengers carried on guaranteed routings and not for empty a/c. And that Aurigny get a similar subsidy.

[kcockayne]

Oh well, it all fits together. I must say that this frequency is much closer to where I think the demand figure lies ! Looking forward to the new service.

[Aero Mad]

Licences have been granted for new routes to Jersey and Cherbourg. Julian Storey at Biggin Hill is working with a firm called Wessex Aviation (??) to set up a Turbine Islander operation out of Alderney called Air Alderney Ltd. 2x daily to JER and a less frequent pax-freight combi operation to CER. Regs on eight seat operations are considerably less stringent than for the Tris; cost per ASM likely rather lower. Licences have been granted by the States for a July start. Whether an AOC is forthcoming within this rather tight time-frame (none currently; CAA list (https://www.caa.co.uk/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=4294978174)) has yet to be seen.

New link planned between Jersey & Alderney | Bailiwick Express (http://www.bailiwickexpress.com/jsy/news/new-link-planned-between-jersey-alderney/#.WJ2r3VOLTIU)

[Hermite]

Lucky for Alderney that those who wanted to replace Aurigny with Citywing (operated by Van Air) didn't succeed. It appears that Van Air have had permission to operate in the UK withdrawn by the CAA after flying from the Isle of Man to Belfast, aborting and returning to the Isle of Man during Storm Doris. Citywing services are currently being operated by a Titan 737.

[rhutch28]

Good thing they didn't replace Aurigny with Citywing. As they have now gone out of business
Citywing statement | Citywing News (http://www.citywingnews.com/citywing-statement/)

[davidjohnson6]

Any updates on how Air Alderney are progressing towards operating commercial passenger flights ?

[Malthouse]

It seems fairly quiet....

[five zero by ortac]

They are busy building an airline. I'm sure they will release more news in the next few weeks.

[tibbs87]

Looks like Air Alderney are poised to take bookings from mid-June, after questions asked on an update on their facebook page (they are currently refurbishing the interior of one of the Islanders).

https://www.facebook.com/AirAlderney/

[davidjohnson6]

How much of Air Alderney's business model would depend on picking up custom from summer seasonal holiday passengers ? Or are they aiming almost entirely at people living in the Channel Islands ?

[tibbs87]

I think they are primarily aiming services for Alderney businesses & residents, especially with a dedicated freight flight too. I think starting out small to serve the islander's needs first is a good business model, rather than going in all guns ablaze and trying to serve multiple markets. I think they will expand when the demand is there, quite a sensible move & good luck to them - will be interesting to see the stats in the first months of them operating, let's see if they will be more reliable than Aurigny ;)

[kcockayne]

Whilst I do agree with what has been written above, I think that Air Alderney will be grateful for whatever business they can get ! You have to remember that the population of Alderney is below 2000 (with a seasonal increase in the summer). Nevertheless, there is not much business to be had (hence the losses on air services over many years). So, visitors will be eagerly touted for business, along with any other sector that might present itself.

[welkyboy]

I believe the aircraft that Air Alderney are planning to use are ex military ( Ghana Navy?) Turbine Islanders that are currently at Biggin Hill being refurbished, have there been any civilian AOC operations with this type of aircraft in the UK? If not there may be some delay in getting a CofA issued for passenger carrying.

[Cloud1]

Loganair use the islander for some Scottish interisland routes (westray etc)

[welkyboy]

I know that the Islander is used for Public Transport flights in UK but I'm talking about the Turbine Islander which as far as I know has not been certified in UK for public transport flights...

[JiggleyMonkey]

I know that the Islander is used for Public Transport flights in UK but I'm talking about the Turbine Islander which as far as I know has not been certified in UK for public transport flights...

The BN2T has been a type certified on the UK register with several companies including Flight Refuelling Ltd (FRA)

[Sleepybhudda]

The subtle point is that although type certificated its never been operated under Part CAT for passenger ops. The CAA or 2-REG authority might bring up unexpected things in an audit. One I can think of would be an impending requirement for Turbine Aircraft below a certain seat number to have TAWS-A, that's not just slapping a GTN or GNS in the cockpit.


FRA wouldn't have that problem as they would be PART SPO for their special kind of stuff like fisheries patrol.


When you start down the AOC path you cannot believe the stuff that comes out of the wood work.


Personally I question the use of the Turbine Islander vs the piston one. Flown the Islander and Trislander out of Alderney and they work, Islander better than the Trislander. Those Rolls-Royce turbines will cause problems. Across the world I cant find any (please prove me wrong) that use them for pax ops with such short sectors.


Being part of a management team of an airline is a stress full, unsympathetic job with just about everyone demanding more. I think Alderney should just be grateful that Aurigny has stayed around. No AOC operator can make a decent living of just Alderney traffic that's why they have to expand and eventually leave (Blueislands and probably Aurigny) or fail like Air Sarnia (granted air Sarnia had some other interesting issues).
If Alderney isn't careful they will wind up with just a boat service.


The best model for Alderney residents is to get involved with WAVES and its 2-REG Cessna caravan operation. If they serve all the islands near France and UK then any losses can be shared around an entire channel island network. Most in the business have always know that the Caravan was the only answer. It works in so many other places there just not worth naming, one PT6A and associated overhaul and parts network, JET-A1 fuel etc etc


Ahhhh rant over...I feel better back to the paperwork.

[Flightrider]

Are you kidding? With the performance limitations inherent in the EASA Part-SET requirements then the Caravan is not good for island-hopping given the drift-down stipulations. If you are flying on/off an island, it either needs to be a) a large one or b) very close indeed to the next island to provide the adequate alternates during the climb and descent phases. Waves might be very aptly named.

[Sleepybhudda]

Not Kidding, the Cessna Caravan with a cargo pod with a cruise of 170 KTAS would cover the distance ACI- GCI, GCI-JER, JER-DNR, ACI-CER, ACI-JER in less than the 15 min specified below.




AMC1 SPA.SET-IMC.105(d)(2) SET-IMC operations




FLIGHT PLANNING


(a) The operator should establish flight planning procedures to ensure that the routings and cruise altitude are selected so as to have a landing site within gliding range.


(b) Notwithstanding (a), one or more risk periods of no more than a total of 15 minutes per flight may be determined whenever a landing site is not within gliding range and for the following operations:


(1) over water;


Granted in very strong winds you would have to be careful, but I reckon the 15 min restriction could be extended after a trials as ICAO does not specific a time in its SET-IMC criteria in Annex 6 App 3.


Waves didn't start up for no reason.

[Flightrider]

The same EASA Part-SET rule set also contains a lot of additional provisions about operator training programmes, engine reliability programmes (specific to the operator and not the manufacturer) and a whole load of issues which it will be distinctly challenging to achieve as a start-up operator. As with all regulatory measures, it is a package of requirements rather than a pick-and-mix and I still remain highly sceptical that this concept can be applied in practice by new AOC holder. Time will tell.

My scepticism isn't helped by the fact (as stated in their presentation that I saw) Waves seem to think you can fly a Cessna Caravan with more than 10 passengers with a single pilot, which you can't?

[01475]

I'm not entirely convinced it's necessarily in Alderney's interests to allow Aurigny to be potentially de-stabilised by new operators with little history or reputation.

Competition is good... unless you have a population of 2,000 and risk hosting a race to the bottom?

[jensdad]

Sleepybuddha, you have piqued my interest... What were the 'interesting issues' that Air Sarnia suffered from? If you are able to discuss them in a public forum, that is! ;)

[Malthouse]

I'm not entirely convinced it's necessarily in Alderney's interests to allow Aurigny to be potentially de-stabilised by new operators with little history or reputation.

Competition is good... unless you have a population of 2,000 and risk hosting a race to the bottom?

I agree, giving Aurigny the chance to pull out of Alderney leaving us with no air links at all if Air Alderney don't pan out.

However, the absence of flights to Jersey and general lack of flights/freight/medical is even more pressing. IMHO

[kcockayne]

I agree, giving Aurigny the chance to pull out of Alderney leaving us with no air links at all if Air Alderney don't pan out.

However, the absence of flights to Jersey and general lack of flights/freight/medical is even more pressing. IMHO
Being an Alderney resident, you'd know more about the actual demand for a Jersey route than I would, but what exactly is this demand ? After all, it has been tried before & didn't last,

[Malthouse]

Being an Alderney resident, you'd know more about the actual demand for a Jersey route than I would, but what exactly is this demand ? After all, it has been tried before & didn't last,

When Rockhopper and Aurigny both operated the route it was well used, those were different economic times of course.

I don't believe Aurigny's refusal to operate the route has anything to do with profit, it has everything to do with the States of Guernsey's flawed desire to have Guernsey be a "hub".

There is a strong demand for travel in both directions, Alderney residents with family and social ties to Jersey and vice versa. Jersey's onward destinations are the best of all the islands, so the potential for businesses to market to those areas is a great opportunity.

The trial that was underwritten by the States of Alderney a few years ago was designed to fail, they picked a 5 week window avoiding all school holidays for a start. Even so it was uses enough to break even, without any effective marketing or planning.

[Feet on ground]

The trial operated on Friday and Sunday afternoons in late summer/autumn, any route should work at that time over a limited period, it proved nothing. Operating in the winter, it will be a disaster, just like it was when it operated previously.

How can there possibly be a sustainable demand to use Jersey as a hub when the population of Alderney is around 1600 people, and the business community maybe attracts 3 or 4 visitors a day from off island, with most of them being day trips?

[Malthouse]

How can there possibly be a sustainable demand to use Jersey as a hub...

I am not saying the demand is for Jersey to be a hub, simply that Jersey is a better option that Guernsey is.

[Aero Mad]

The history of ACI-JER is fairly prosaic and its current dormancy to my knowledge has very little to do directly any desire on the part of the States of Guernsey for it not to operate. After it was relinquished by BUA, Aurigny operated the route from Jul 1968 until Oct 2004, carrying between around 10-20,000 passengers pa (numbers peaked in 1989, flattening out to around 15,000 in the late 1990s and 10,000 in the early 2000s). Rockhopper was successful in its application to operate in 2003; the two airlines carried 10,000 passengers together (hardly growing the market at all). Numbers fell to just under 5,000 in 2004. Blue Islands then dropped the route, operated it seasonally (often with Islanders) from 2006-9, and did not fly during 2010 nor 2011 (its last year of ACI operations).

Having established its main base of operation in Guernsey, Aurigny wasn't going to restart a route which would both lose money in its own right and feed potential ACI residents away from GR's GCI-mainland and onto others' JER-mainland services. This decision is almost purely commercial and not directly political; States members have mandated it to minimise its losses - they have not mandated it to run an ACI-JER service justified by wider economic benefit (much as it used to). This comes down to a complete lack of vision from Alderney States members who spend far too much complaining about Aurigny and almost none trying to improve it, much as I pointed out at the time of their ludicrous requête. Asking it to run a (lossmaking) ACI-JER service is a decision involving taxpayers' money, so it's not one for Aurigny to make on its own.

The take-up of the 2013 trial was more than satisfactory, but the States of Alderney did not fund the operation thereafter. It's a ridiculous way to fund an airline and a measure of how poor the States of Alderney's efforts at actually working with (not against) the States of Guernsey and Aurigny to improve services have been that it had to be paid for in this way (and also a measure of how unaware T&R is of Alderney's requirements). Subsidies for ACI-JER are just the same as subsidies for ACI-GCI and should be rolled into the same debt write-offs/PSOs.

Every minute States of Alderney members spend slagging off the States of Guernsey's airline in the pages of their press is a minute they could use to lobby Gavin St Pier, the wider States of Guernsey and Aurigny as to the economic benefits of the links they want. I know not whether it is conviction or expertise they lack, but for as long as they spend more time engaged in meaningless, introspective and grandstanding debate than attempting to engage constructively with the issues at hand and the organisations and people that have a more direct role in choosing where, when, for whom and at what cost Aurigny is asked to fly, it shall be one or the other. Glad to see efforts to restore it, but unsurprised to see it wasn't States of Alderney members who took the initiative. Stop blaming. Take responsibility.

http://www.itv.com/news/channel/2017-04-19/flights-between-jersey-and-alderney-could-be-created-to-boost-tourism/

[kcockayne]

That sums it all up quite well, AeroMad. Well done.

[Aero Mad]

Runway extension being given serious consideration. Business case to go to the States of Guernsey Policy & Resources committee at the end of the month.

Press Release - runway project team reveals Alderney options - States of Alderney (http://www.alderney.gov.gg/article/188397/Press-Release---runway-project-team-reveals-Alderney-options)

[Malthouse]

What do you think the chances are?

[kcockayne]

They may well approve it; but what will it do for Alderney? On an island of less than 2000 people, with a very small tourism industry, if you operate fifty seaters instead of twenty seaters, it would appear to me that you are only going to succeed in getting 40 percent of the flights that you get now. So, sacrifice frequency ( as far as it is possible to call it "frequency") in favour of a more comfortable, far less frequent service. You pays your money (or, rather, the States Of Guernsey does) & you makes your choice.

[Aero Mad]

The question here is about the amount of money 'you pays'. An ATR 72-600 could take 55ish pax on a restricted load basis from an extended runway, with projected figures of 3% less fuel burn compared to the existing Dornier operation, with a reduction in subsidy from £2m to £1.3m per year at current figures. The runway and terminal, which were built in 1967, need rebuilding anyway. The runway was resurfaced in the late 1980s and in 2006, and is now crumbling to an extent that it requires regular and expensive repairs. The fire station has asbestos in its roof. It may be that it would 'only' cost an extra £8-15m to extend the runway, build a slightly bigger terminal, etc, vs to rebuild to the same length.

The other side of the coin are the political considerations. Given the size of its structural deficit, the States of Guernsey mayn't be willing, in the future, to make this level of investment in Alderney - so it's not an issue which can be returned to simply or reliably at a later date. The political will is definitely there at the moment (if the numbers are right) - but it may evaporate as Guernsey's tax debate focuses more on spending cuts, the constituent members of P&R change, and/or Peter Ferbrache ceases to be president of P&R. Hydrogen and battery powered aircraft, even of Dornier size, are likely to require longer runways than conventionally fuelled versions for take off. So, even if the ATR seems a white elephant in a decade, there is a significant element of future-proofing in option C.

Much will rest on the business case presented to P&R at the end of the month, in terms of the opportunity cost and the pay-back period of the investment. This is a decision which will determine a lot for the future of the island, whatever decision is made, and it will be very interesting to see the figures.

[kcockayne]

Nicely explained, Aero Mad. It may well be that a longer runway will be needed, as you say, but I don't really see how this will benefit the island's economy (even if Alderney is not paying for it); or how the islanders expectations of more frequent, less expensive flights will materialize.

[five zero by ortac]

Good comments. The real questions are;

Is a longer runway needed - Yes
Will fleet consolidation improve Aurigny's finances - Yes
Will the business case add up - probably not when you take into account higher airport operating costs and buying in Medivac
Would this improve Alderney's economy - No
Will this provide higher flight frequencys - No
Does this reduce fares - No
Is there the money to do this - No

Also your 55 pax payload is for a perfect day, dry runway and wind straight down it. An average winter day is 37. A bad day = no flight.
However, to future proof the airport, yes it should be extended.

[Malthouse]

Really good post Aero Mad, thank you

Seems to me to be a less logical process, the books have not balanced (no one has really tried) since 1948, so it has to be a decision based on what is needed to move forward. In the long room it will benefit the whole Bailiwick

Alderney has carried it's weight in the past and may well again, but not if forced into being a 3rd rate backwater

Government, especially transport, cannot be based solely on bean counting over 3 years

[adfly]

Any logic in Aurigny picking up 1/2 ATR42 for to operate from an extended Alderney runway? The short field 'S' models would probably quite reliably carry a full load in most conditions, and they can work on slimmer Guernsey routes as well, not to mention the obvious commonality with the '72 fleet.

[KindaUnstuck]

The medical side is covered by Social Security in Guernsey so it's swings and roundabouts in a way as they wouldn't be paying for Aurigny to cover the service but it may bring down the per leg cost of the contract they have with Gama Aviation and potentially be offset by lower costs for medical patients that need to travel on schedule services to Guernsey or Southampton if they can negotiate lower medical fares... On the flip side, any Alderney patient going to Southampton would be unable to go for check ups as a day trip, so Health would end up having to pay for overnight accommodation.

As said above, presumably we're looking at an extra ATR also which may help with the current Aurigny Guernsey schedule and Alderney Airport does need work done to it - but it's a lot of work that isn't necessarily going to bring about wide scale benefits for everyone, even if in reality it has to be done to at least keep the airport in a decent state.

[rog747]

Any logic in Aurigny picking up 1/2 ATR42 for to operate from an extended Alderney runway? The short field 'S' models would probably quite reliably carry a full load in most conditions, and they can work on slimmer Guernsey routes as well, not to mention the obvious commonality with the '72 fleet.

Yes the new ATR42 600S may just be OK for Alderney's 880m runway as is - ATR say that economical loads of 42 pax on 200nm missions can be flown to and off 800m.
The ATR72 needs around 1100m T/O and over 900m LDG.

Sadly no good for St Mary's ISC which is just short of 700m long - even too short for a small Dash 8-100 with restricted payload.
Only the Twotter reigns still - the Dash -7 would be now ideal but that ship sailed years ago.

[kcockayne]

Good comments. The real questions are;

Is a longer runway needed - Yes
Will fleet consolidation improve Aurigny's finances - Yes
Will the business case add up - probably not when you take into account higher airport operating costs and buying in Medivac
Would this improve Alderney's economy - No
Will this provide higher flight frequencys - No
Does this reduce fares - No
Is there the money to do this - No

Also your 55 pax payload is for a perfect day, dry runway and wind straight down it. An average winter day is 37. A bad day = no flight.
However, to future proof the airport, yes it should be extended.
five zero sums it all up, in my opinion.
On the subject of reducing costs for hospital patients; back in August The States Of Jersey paid £196 for a one way trip from Southampton to Jersey for me. I have no idea what they paid Gama to get me there (brilliant service, I have to say). So, let us hope that the island governments can negotiate some sort of rebate on these flights !

[Aero Mad]

Yes the new ATR42 600S may just be OK for Alderney's 880m runway as is - ATR say that economical loads of 42 pax on 200nm missions can be flown to and off 800m.
The ATR72 needs around 1100m T/O and over 900m LDG.

Cost of the extension over rebuilding estimated at only £12-15m more; even if it's £25m, the extra cost of acquiring one or two 42-600s, and having an additional type in the fleet, is likely to cancel this out. There would also be less resilience to the service if it were to depend on another type.

Would this improve Alderney's economy - No

If you're providing 20,000 extra seats, as you would with a couple of GCI returns and one SOU return per day as a minimum level of service (with extra capacity available in summer, important for Alderney's intensely seasonal market), and can do so at the same or lower CASM and fares, given the bottlenecks which the limits to the current service place on Alderney's economy, I don't think it's possible to say with any certainty that this wouldn't improve the situation.

Whether it is affordable for the Bailiwick is a more difficult question. What we do know from the last ten years is that Alderney in managed decline is - and would for a very long time be - a very expensive policy choice indeed.

[bmaviscount]

Wouldn't some brand new islanders be a better option with improved frequency on both the GCI SOU and even JER routes

[Wycombe]

Alderney should be a ideal environment for the new Cessna Skycourier (https://cessna.txtav.com/en/turboprop/skycourier-passenger)
Just certificated in the US.

[jmdavies86]

Wouldn't some brand new islanders be a better option with improved frequency on both the GCI SOU and even JER routes

I believe that's what Air Alderney (https://www.airalderney.co.uk/) are hoping to achieve, albeit they're not using brand new BN Islanders.

[Malthouse]

Alderney should be a ideal environment for the new Cessna Skycourier (https://cessna.txtav.com/en/turboprop/skycourier-passenger)
Just certificated in the US.

Looks nice! :)

[Aero Mad]

Alderney held to ransom by runway repairs - The Times (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/alderney-channel-island-blonde-hedgehog-sinkhole-runway-gvlf2ks70)