SOUTHEND

[Lite]

Just fishing around for those familiar with Southend, Manston & Lydd who probably don't quite warrant a post of their own at this time, whether there are any developments currently being undertaken?

[HZ123]

Southend-endless rumours little action and a time scale akin to Wembley, the existing terminal looks well worn and a disgrace for the few travellers passing thru. Manston nice terminal (empty) and Lydd has been mentioned on the site and is underggoing a lot of changes plus a new terminal but fail to see who is going to fly from there. As you say they do not warrant a spot, at all?

[airhumberside]

The main development at SEN is that the recent government railway planning assesment for East Anglia included plans for an airport station

There's more on Manston here - http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=202125&page=6

[approach24]

Agree that the terminal at Southend is looking a little tired however, with the work currently going on to extend the carpark in front of the existing terminal to accomodate an additional 200+ cars combined with the fact that the airport held recruitment days in the terminal on Monday and Tuesday of this week looking for 6 additional part time check-in staff, 12 Security Officers and 4 additional full time fire fighters "as a result of recent business opportunities" (see airport website (jobs)), would seem to suggest that something is in the pipeline for the not too distant future ?

[HZ123]

approach 24 ; this flurry of activity is for the Ford EU I believe but I still content that this contract will add little to the building of a new terminal which at the current rate will not be ready for the forthcoming olympics which must be the key to its future.

[PPRuNe Pop]

Southend doesn't warrant a post!!!? Why ever not? If someone has something of interest about what Southend are up to we would all like to hear of it. There is NO restriction about starting a thread for Southend.

PPP

[Stanstedeye]

Noted outside the paintshop yesterday was an Excel 737
and a Jet2 757

[southender]

Back in February 2005, I did start a thread for Southend news.

Trouble is, since then not a lot has happened apart from regular articles in the local press that the future is rosy and developments are imminent.

We do get the occasional bits of good news, like the Ford contract, the maintenance side of things looks very active and there seems to be a significant increase in biz-jets. On the down side the Emerald cargo operation did'nt last long and Flybe seem to be dragging their heels.

Would like to think there will be sufficient interest and news to prevent this thread going the same way as my earlier one. I'll certainly post anything I hear which may be of interest.

Cheers

Southender.

[airhumberside]

Is the Ford Contract the B737BBJ flights to CGN that are presently at STN?

[PPRuNe Pop]

Now its got its own thread! ;)

[tilewood]

Now its got its own thread! ;)


Thanks. Now with Ford's operations plus other developments it should become
a long running thread!! :ok:

[airchabum]

I presume the 'Ford contact' is the company shuttle flights that currently use STN....can someone confirm please? Also does anyone know the state of play with the 737BBJs as most of the current flights from STN have been operated by Excel/Titan/etc.

Glad to see some good news for SEN after years in the doldrums. Hopefully Flybe will add more services in the not too distant future.

Cheers

[tilewood]

The first of the Jersey schedules began today, courtesy of a Flybe
Dash 8 Q400

Plus a charter to Cardiff, something about a football match?!! ;)

[HZ123]

Did it manage to be late? It managed it for the majority of last seasons flights. Do not go building your hopes up.

[southender]

Seems like this thread is going the same way as the earlier Southend threads, so to bring it back to the top I'll ask if anyone knows how the Ford flights are going.

What times are departures and arrivals?

Is the MD83 flying the Turkish Route?

It does seem to me that there are more Flightline positioning flights these days so perhaps it's going well.

Await replies with baited breath.

Cheers

Southender

[AlphaWhiskyRomeo]

The MD83 is indeed flying the Turkish route from STN.

[approach24]

Southend Council recently submitted its proposal for a regional casino to be located in the town (available on the web). The document covers a number of areas including transport links and specifically, the towns airport and how it intends to re-introduce passanger flights.

Quote " Flybe will be incorporating 14 new flight paths into its business plan from 2007".

Not sure if 'flight paths' means 14 routes, 14 flights per day/week or none of these, but it's very specific and would seem to confirm/suggest that Flybe will be introducing some new routes from Southend next year.

[tilewood]

Rumour has it that the FordAir flights ex Sen begin early June.

[Stanstedeye]

Seems like this thread is going the same way as the earlier Southend threads, so to bring it back to the top I'll ask if anyone knows how the Ford flights are going.
What times are departures and arrivals?
Is the MD83 flying the Turkish Route?
It does seem to me that there are more Flightline positioning flights these days so perhaps it's going well.
Await replies with baited breath.
Cheers
Southender

Below are the proposed schedules of the FLT MD83 flights from STN:

Monday 07.00-16.00 to Dalaman
16.55-01.50 to Bodrum

Thursday 07.00-16.00 to Arrecife

Friday 07.00-16.00 to Tenerife
17.00-01.50 to Dalaman

[HZ123]

This still does not clarify the whom what where and why the Ford op will commence at SEN. Once again the big day is this weekend's airshow?

[frostbite]

Aircraft with 24 pax diverted from Stansted to Southend today, following report from crew of burning insulation smell in cabin.

Smell virtually gone by approach time, and satnav said to have expired.

No dramas.

[IRRenewal]

I presume the 'Ford contact' is the company shuttle flights that currently use STN....can someone confirm please? Also does anyone know the state of play with the 737BBJs as most of the current flights from STN have been operated by Excel/Titan/etc.

The 737 BBJs were sold to the US military some years ago and were replaced with a coupe of ex Braathens 737-700s.

[tilewood]

Posted on another site. The Ford's flights to Cologne began yesterday.
Two rotations per day ex Southend, using Flightline 146 equipment.

[Barnaby the Bear]

Doe's this mean Southend might now start building that illusive Terminal and Railway station they talk about? :}

[HZ123]

Surely of greater importance a coat of emulsion and gloss has been applied to various areas within the terminal and the cafe now has daily papers. However, I do not see this having any effect on the time scales of the new terminal the dates / plans of which are becoming more elusive by the day?

[southender]

So where is Flightline sourcing their aircraft for the Fordair flights?

Do they have a 146 based at Southend now or are they positioning from Aberdeen, or elsewhere? Heard an early morning Flightline arrival this morning, which leads me to ask the question.

Also, would appreciate knowing the departure and arrival times as I might like to pop down and have a cup of tea and read a newspaper in the 'refurbished' terminal!!!!! I remember discovering 'Propliner' in newsagents in the old terminal many years ago.

Still, it's nice to see a bit of activity again.

Cheers

Southender

[bravo 4 golf]

Ford flights are operated by a Flightline 146 , G-BPNT BAe146-300 , which has been based at SEN for flightline for years. It is now configured with 90 seats iso of its usual 48 or 99/110

[HZ123]

Additionally the Flightline 146 operated the FlyBe JER on saturday as once again there was 3 Dash 8's u/s. The inbound a/c arrived 7 hours late. There was a rumour that the service was going to be pulled as RAL are fed up with the poor punctuality record in addition to the first two services that were transferred to LGW.

[airhumberside]

Airports of the World Magazine reports Fordair will get a RJ80 (I assume they mean a RJ85) and base it at SEN to operate the flights. A high security car park for Ford workers has been built at the airport

[tilewood]

There is also a good article in Airports of the World Magazine July-August 2006 edition about Southend .

[IRRenewal]

A high security car park for Ford workers has been built at the airport

That doesn't make the airport secure.

Cheers

Gerard (ex FordAir pilot)

[tilewood]

No airport by definition can be totally secure Gerard, and if you haven't already,then I hope you soon find new employment.

[IRRenewal]

We all have, so no worries there. Thanks for your concern.

It just makes me laugh they built a 'secure car park' at an airfield with holes in the fence. Pictures can be supplied on request.

[smallpilot]

The new Car park for Ford Employees is very secure and there are NO holes in the fence. Southend may not be Fort Knox but compared to other places its good. Those who seek to 'diss' the security I'd like to see your evidence....

[IRRenewal]

As requested. Taken in April this year (not by me), by someone who wandered around with a camera for ages taking these pictures without ever being challenged by security.
http://www.irrenewal.com/snd/southend%20security%20001.jpg
http://www.irrenewal.com/snd/southend%20security%20002.jpg
http://www.irrenewal.com/snd/southend%20security%20004.jpg
http://www.irrenewal.com/snd/southend%20security%20006.jpg
Smallpilot: I am sure the carpark is very secure. I never said it wasn't. I didn't even say that the airfield is not secure. I just pointed out there are (or at least two months ago were) some holes in the fence.

[HZ123]

Southend = Secure airport, you must be on something I thing after the preceding pictures the prosecution can rest their case. As much as I like the place 'What is there to secure anyway'?

[Barnaby the Bear]

A commercial pilot I have known for years, flew into SEN. Their areas on on the apron with Fords flights were very tight on security. Nobody could go near the the stand without being challenged or security screened.
:}

[Expressflight]

I received an email from Flybe several weeks ago stating that they had "no further plans" for routes from SEN, which doesn't sound too hopeful, although I suppose it could mean no definite plans as yet.

The 'Evening Echo' also reports that the planning application for the proposed station Parkway has been withdrawn due to local opposition and that a revised planning application is being drawn up in that regard.

Neither of the above are likely to lead to an early start on building the new terminal I fear.

Expressflight.

[Barnaby the Bear]

According to their website, a building on the site of the new Terminal development is up for lease. It doe's say short term though.
I would happily fly from there. Stay at my relatives, walk to the airport (well short taxi ride). ...Oh well. :cool:



Surely Flybe is not the only carrier that could operate from there? What about Air Southwest, Aer Aarann, VLM etc. I understand the runway won't allow pax loads of 737's etc, but it must have a similar operation capability to London City, Plymouth and the like? I would of thought it would also be cheaper than Gatwick or Stansted etc. to operate from?

[Stanstedeye]

The long term stored 707 has now moved to outside the paint shop.
Does this mean that it is soon to fly again?

[fj1]

Stanstedeye

Yes, sometime later this year, now VH-XBA

[Stanstedeye]

fj1

Good news that it will fly again. Any info on how much work to be undertaken
on VH-XBA at Southend.

[spanishflea]

Looks like Qantas have bought it, as its now registered to QANTAS FOUNDATION MEMORIAL LTD.

[HZ123]

There is also a thread on this a/c on aircraft history seeking more infomation as to the project datews on this 707. I suggested that it be displayed on the August Bank Holiday when the Vulcan does a couple of run ups, There is a lot of interest on this a/c within the UK and let us hope there will be oppertunity to see it before it goes to the USA?

[Stanstedeye]

Latest repaint is 737-300 for ARIKAIR. Wings of Nigeria.
Name on nose is EDDINGTON. At present it carries number N36IUA.

[HZ123]

Is this to celebrate Rod Eddington?

[Expressflight]

Two days ago RAL lodged a planning application for an extension of the EXISTING terminal.

This will involve a 1473 square metre extension to the existing terminal to provide "modern check-in facilities" plus a new arrivals waiting area etc.. The plans also call for 500 new car parking spaces and revision of the landside road network. Sounds as if they are going to extend the terminal landside onto the existing car park.

This would tie in with the suggestion that the new terminal target opening date seems to have slipped by several years and that target airlines such as FlyBe were not prepared to inaugurate new routes using the existing terminal with its, to say the least, limited facilities and space.

Quite where this leaves plans for the new terminal is anyone's guess, but at least it might result in an early improvement in facilities.

Rochford District Council are anticipating making a decision on the application in August so work could begin in the autumn hopefully, making the new facilities available for summer 2007 (my conjecture only, not confirmed by RAL).

[tilewood]

Expressflight

Should bring it back to it's old size back in the '60s!! What goes around comes around!! ;)

[Expressflight]

You're exactly right Tilewood.

Those were the days.......

[southender]

So, where does this leave the plans for the grand integrated terminal and station on the eartern perimeter?

Is this an interim measure whilst RAL sorts out the green belt/local residents objections to the proposed commuter's car park or will the proposed plan now simply fade away?

Surprisingly, or not maybe, no one from the airport was available to comment on the article reporting the expansion plans when it appeared in the local press.

However, expansion of the existing terminal must mean the management are expecting an upturn in business as I'm sure this development is not purely for the benefit of Ford's employees.

As long as they re-instate the newsagent/magazine/bookshop of years gone bye in the re-vamped terminal I'll be happy.

Cheers

Southender

[HZ123]

Papers are on sale in the cafe as we speak. I think this is dissapointing and once again the future hangs in the balance. Unless they intend to spend lots which I doubt a botch up may not be enough to attract anyone? Surely there is an issue with the lack of stand facilities, fuel provision, equipment, safety equipment, restricted / controlled zone and general security. Much of this can only be overcome by a new terminal and even an improvment on the present cannot match SOU or Manston I feel, which is no more than operaters expect as standard fare. Lets hope I am proved wrong as usual?

[Expressflight]

I don't quite follow HZ123s comments regarding "lack of stand facilities, fuel provision, equipment, safety equipment, restricted/controlled zone and general security." as being major problems. Perhaps he can elaborate.

Included in the planning application is provision for a new airside security fence and surely there is no problem with stand capacity nor refuelling (OK, not hydrant, but that hardly matters surely?). SEN's geographical position has also always been held as advantageous with regard to Airway access and standard arrival and departure procedures are already in place aren't they?

I certainly cannot understand why RAL failed to issue a Press Release or to answer the Evening Echo's enquiries (the paper having reported the planning application as a very positive move). Perhaps RAL didn't realise the news would come out so quickly, which was pretty naive of them if so.

As far as the extension being "a botch up", I doubt that the application would be approved if that were so and I can see no reason why the resulting modified terminal should not be user-friendly and perfectly acceptable to potential airline customers. I shiny new terminal doesn't ensure lots of business anyway - been to Caen recently? Nice terminal -shame about the almost total lack of traffic. What's important to potential airlines is the large catchment area that SEN possesses, as well as having the caché of being 'London Southend', and providing the terminal ensures efficient, pleasant processing of the pax to ensure rapid turnrounds I cannot see an airline complaining that the terminal isn't a marble-halled palace.

The loss of the railway station (if the new terminal has been put on ice) is a drawback but perhaps the bus shuttle to Rochford station could be reinstated.

As Southender suggests, it certainly looks as if there has been sufficient airline interest to warrant this move so let's hope it leads to some route announcements in the next few months.

[Buster the Bear]

Rumours of a certain UK airline starting scheduled operations from Southend seem to have a lot of substance.....Watch this space!

[Barnaby the Bear]

Go on Buster.......Gis a clue???!!!!!!

Fed up of paying parking at the larger airports in the area. Especially when I can park for free at my relatives.......I'm not tight though!!!! :} :} :}

[Buster the Bear]

Well, which airline has been rumoured?

Why develop an existing passenger facility so rapidly?

[airhumberside]

Is it to be the long talked about expansion from Flybe from their existing summer Saturday JER flight?

[Buster the Bear]

Well, why would you expand a facility for passengers?

[HZ123]

The existing terminal was a temporary construction in 1960, thus I cannot see any development of that building being much more than a botched up make over. RAL as said seems to have missed tha boat again?

[Buster the Bear]

HZ123, the passengers will need somewhere to pass through next year.

[HZ123]

At an average of about 40 pax a day it will not need to be larger than the average front room?

[Expressflight]

In order to ease HZ123's extremely pessimistic view of events, perhaps I can quote from the current edition of Airports of the World.

RAL's business development manager is quoted as saying, in the context of talking about the new terminal/railway station development:

"In the meantime, the existing terminal building will be refurbished shortly, allowing it to handle up to 750,000 passengers a year as a stop-gap measure until the new terminal opens in 2009. ....... further check-in counters will be added and the terminal extended forward once the car park in front of the building has been modified."

This statements seems exactly in line with the planning application lodged earlier this week, so does not seem to threaten, or even delay, the building of the new terminal. I do think that RAL has invited all this speculation, however, by not making a statement at the time clarifying matters.

Whether or not this extension turns out to be a 'botch up' or not doesn't really matter that much if it only has to meet the needs of the next 3 or 4 years.

[HZ123]

My view is not pessimistic I would say it is realistic, as from whence they are going to get 750,000 between now and 2009 can only be via a miracle. I am inclined to ignore some of the hype that would serve the Office of the deputy Prime Minister quite well?

[tilewood]

HZ123

Sorry HZ123, I have to agree with Expressflight, almost all your comments
about Southend seem to major on the negative. You also end each post
with a question mark which makes it rather difficult to follow whatever
point you are trying to make.

We all know the difficulties and constraints peculiar to Southend, but it has
great potential as a local community airport, close to London and with a
catchment area of 5 million within an hour's drive. Given local support and
a following wind it will become a successful gateway.

[daz211]

tilewood

I have to question your point on the catchment area within an hours drive of southend being 5 million with the fastest growing airport in europe only approx 30/40mins away i think stansted has taken much of that 5 million
I live about 30 mins from stansted and 40 mins from southend i know which i would rather travel from.
also the roads to southend are a nightmare without an airport
the A127 and the A12, A13 I wouldnt even chance it for a departure before 1100 taking into acount chk-in times
also its not many more miles to gatwick

sorry to sound negative but the geography is all wrong for southend in my view sorry if i have upset anyone its just my view :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Expressflight]

I am sure that the catchment area for SEN, be it 2 million or 5 million, will not prove a problem to the success of routes from SEN.

Also, it has never been suggested that 750,000 pax are expected to use the airport by 2009 and the planning application gives a figure of 500,000 for the capacity of the extended terminal. In any event annual capacity in itself is not a useful number as it must take into account seasonal peak demands or diversion capacity which may be very demanding if only for short periods of time.

It is often assumed that routes from a 'new' airport must poach existing traffic from similar routes already established at relatively nearby airports (although to say that SEN is 30/40 minutes from STN by road is stretching it a bit). This is not the case and the phenominal success of the LCCs is based upon the fact that an entirely new market is opened up. People who would not normally have flown to a given destination have been found to do so once services are available from what they regard as their local airport.

As a small example my family in the Southend area have generated 12 passenger movements on the SEN-JER route this summer. All of these were additional holidays, over and above their normal 'main' holiday, and they would not have flown to Jersey had the SEN route not existed. The same will be repeated on any other new routes opened up.

The catchment area around SEN also has no relevance to inbound flights from European or UK cities opened up by airlines seeking a near-London arrival airport.

One has only to look at the success of routes from NWI - is it some 14 destinations served from there now by Flybe?
The Southend/Rayleigh/Basildon area is twice as populated as the Norwich conurbation and the population of Essex is twice that of Norfolk, so a similar route network from SEN should be sustainable.

My fear had always been that RAL would not modernise the existing terminal until some new routes were inaugurated (the 'chicken and egg' situation), but that now seems to be going ahead and must be a good sign.

[Buster the Bear]

A lot of work is going on in the background to make frequent scheduled services from Southend a reality. It could happen as early as spring 2007. A ready market has been identified, an airline wants to come and I presume development subsidies from somewhere to make it happen.

[Barnaby the Bear]

Lets hope it happens soon. Southend is starting to look a bit tired around the edges.
£25M as stated on their website, is alot of money. Is it enough? and where is it coming from?
Would be good to see regular pax flights from there again.

[HZ123]

Perhaps they can get a sub and get the radar repaired as it is rumoured it will be out for a couple of months, can't see it taking that long elsewhere.

[Expressflight]

I viewed the plans for the extension of the existing terminal yesterday (available on the Rochford District Council website, follow the links to Planning and View Planning Applications, enter reference 06/000546/PD).

The extension, added to the south side of the existing building, effectively becomes the new landside area with some 10 check-in positions, new cafe/bar, retail, car hire and taxi desks etc...

The existing building becomes the airside area, via 2 security channels, with duty-free shop, another cafe/bar, retail, 4 departure gates, VIP lounge etc.. Inbound there are two arrival channels (presumably international & domestic) each leading to its own baggage hall.

While still being a single-storey, low-ceilinged building it certainly looks functional and I would have thought well up to the needs of potential airline customers. I looks, if anything, rather over-the-top if it's just to last until 2009/2010 when the new terminal opens :confused: .

The car parking comprises 500 new spaces, laid out mainly immediately east of the Tower within security fencing.

It all looks rather more than one winter's work to me and it is difficult to see how the terminal could function at anything other than very low pax volumes while the work is underway.

In all events, if the work goes ahead, it will certainly give RAL something to sell to the airlines and then we'll really see if SEN has a future.

[DarkStar]

Well, I must agree with the sentiments of HZ123. SEN will not bring the passengers in unless the airport provides decent facilities. It has to be a completely new facility rather than the current situation of a toilet with an outside terminal.

40 pax, yes but only on a busy day. SEN future seems to lie with its Engineering side and perhaps storage, but even then they are running out of concrete.

Having read the forum, HZ123 may seem pessimistic but probably accurate.

[Buster the Bear]

The existing terminal works are being planned for good reason as I have stated above!

[Expressflight]

Oh come on!

"Atoilet with an outside terminal".

Really, what are you on about?

Have you had a look at the plans?

[Buster the Bear]

Coventry manage very well with Portakabins! Does not stop the punters using this airport.

[Jamie-Southend]

I can see where HZ-123 is coming from, i`m sure he like me, wants to see SEN develop well, but having listened to years and years of New Terminals, Railway Stations, Runway Extensions & a moved Control Tower, its no wonder some of us become a little pessimistic.

By the way the railway station idea was discussed when i moved in the area and lived just 500m from the proposed site.

( That was in 1965 ) ;)

Jamie

[HZ123]

Thank you Jamie for saying exactly as I wanted to. It is refreshing that Ford are flying from SEN for the forseeable future. That said RAI have done no more than put a coat of emulsion around the terminal and irrespective of the future plans it is lucky that Ford seem contend with the surroundings. It could be a lot bewtter with a little effort.

[GuppyEng.com]

Southend will never be the same as in the days of Butlers Bar and Flarepath:(

[Expressflight]

I've today managed to get some information directly from Karen Medworth, RAL's Business Development Manager.

In an email to me she says:

"The interim plans have been put in place to meet the needs of an incoming airline (no one specifically at this point) as the proposed terminal modifications can be completed relatively quickly - anticipated at 6 to 8 months - and would therefore afford an airline sufficient terminal capacity until the new terminal/train station is completed in 2009. It has been a necessary step as we need to demonstrate to potential airlines that their services will be of the same standard as anywhere alse in their network - soemthing that would be difficult at present due to physical limitations in the current terminal."

All the above seems much as I have been suggesting in recent postings, although the phrase "no one specifically at this point" is rather worrying as one would have hoped that, by now, one or more potential airlines would be on the point of signing-up.

I very much doubt that Fordair are particularly content with the existing terminal but more likely have been assured that the extended and modernised terminal is only a few months away.

Comments anyone?

[Jamie-Southend]

I suppose “anything is better than nothing”

Express at least they replied to your email with reasonable details.

I have to say that one of the reasons I am so sceptical about the future & operation of the Airport, is that on 3 occasions in the early 90`s I approached them requesting details, information & a possible meeting in regard to establishing a business on the Airfield. The business was a new venture for us and aviation related, but several emails, faxes and a letter were never replied to.

[tilewood]

I have looked at the plans for the extension of the existing terminal.

They look perfectly acceptable and would readily serve until the traffic
warranted the contruction of the new terminal and station on the
Eastern boundary.

I agree with Expressflight that it is disappointing that no specific airline
is yet being mentioned, but perhaps not surprising . An airline is going
to want to see some firm commitment to improve facilities before it
makes it's own decision to commence operations.

RAL are going to have to bite the bullet and spend some real money if they
want Southend to be taken seriously.

[Barnaby the Bear]

The existing terminal works are being planned for good reason as I have stated above!


Go on gis' another clue? The Flybe rumour was quashed a while ago (Unless that has changed?).

I flew in to Gatwick today, spent quite a while getting through baggage claim (note to self. Buy smaller bag) and then cried at the cost of parking for the measly 5 days away.
I looked at the extension plans for the existing terminal at MC. They look quite encouraging. But will it actually come to fruition in the near future?

Continuing with my unhealthy interest in Southend, I was looking at the plans in the property section. Lots of changes to the North side. But the most striking part was 'New Control Tower'. When are they building that?
I bet the ATCO's can't wait for that! The existing tower, has a very limited view of the 06 Threshold. ..... Or is that way, way in the future?

I shall look for another airport to stalk soon!

[Expressflight]

I learned today from an impeccable source that negotiations are still ongoing with Flybe, but that there is an operational 'issue' with the EMB-195.

I can only assume this to be TODA or LDA being insufficient at SEN to allow MTOW operations of the aircraft.

Does anyone have the 195's performance figures to hand to check this? I have seen those for the 190 and that seems OK, but obviously the 195 is somewhat larger.

[Jamie-Southend]

Embraer`s site states ...

Takeoff Field Length, ISA, MTOW7,386ft2,251m Takeoff Field Length, ISA, SL, TOW for 500nm4,892ft1,491m

Landing Field Length, SL, MLW4,708ft1,435m

And someone please correct me if i am wrong but i think Southend has 1605m runway length?

Jamie

[Barnaby the Bear]

It doe's, but thats total runway length.

06 TORA 1459 TODA 1544 ASDA 1459 LDA1285
24 TORA 1531 TODA 1591 ASDA 1546 LDA1399

Is that enough?

Anyway, I hope it works out for Southend. :}

[Expressflight]

Thanks for those figures Jamie.

Phew! It's a bit of a ground-hugger isn't it?

Hard to think of another 120-seater that needs that length of TODA.

I hate to think what it needs on an ISA-plus day with a ground temp of around 30C say. Even ops out of SOU will be at RTOWs as their TODA is only some 1,800 metres.

I can't really see how SEN can accomodate the 195 realistically, although I had always assumed that Flybe would operate just with Q400s on their planned route network ex SEN. Perhaps their plans are more ambitious than I thought.

My source also says that negotiations are going on with other regionals with a view to commencement of services in Spring 2007. Anyone any ideas who these other operators might be?

[HZ123]

Now chaps without being negative as I have been accused of over the terminal and the other lack of facilities; we now come to another crunch issue what aircraft can actually service the airfield anyway. It seems to me that offering LOCO services on a dash 8 may not be a viable option. Lets face it SEN is not likely to become another LCY. I hope I am proved wrong.

[Stanstedeye]

Latest repaint is 737-300 for ARIKAIR. Wings of Nigeria.
Name on nose is EDDINGTON. At present it carries number N36IUA.

Latest repaint is 737-300 for ARIKAIR, Wings of Nigeria.
Name on nose is AUGUSTINE. At present it carries reg. number N354UA

[ifonly]

Neither Arik was painted at Southend. Both arrived from the US in full 'Arik' colours. Currently on maintenance with ATC.

[frostbite]

To celebrate the 20th anniversary of the Vulcan at Southend it will be performing a power run down the runway tomorrow (Saturday).

The public are invited to attend this special occasion and there will (probably) be an opportunity to visit the cockpit.

Sorry this is short notice - it's in my local rag, dated Weds., and only just delivered by sloppy kids!

[Barnaby the Bear]

Nuts working again... :ugh: I thought they had run last weekend? :confused:

[frostbite]

I thought they had run last weekend?


Knowing the YA, that's entirely possible!

[Expressflight]

Rochford District Council have called for an Environmental Impact Assessment in respect of the effects of increased road traffic generated by the proposal.

This will obviously delay their decision-making process.

[Jamie-Southend]

That`s interesting, did that come from the RDC website??

If so do you have a link?

It can get a little busy around the "Airport" roundabout at weekends, trouble is everyones trying to get to McDonalds & Argoose!

Jamie

[Expressflight]

Jamie,

Yes it's from the RDC website.

I cannot post a link but if you Google Rochford District Council and follow the links on their website vto Planning Appications, then click on Enter Public Access at the bottom of that page. Then enter 06/00546 in the application number field, that will take you to it.

[Barnaby the Bear]

Rochford District Council have called for an Environmental Impact Assessment in respect of the effects of increased road traffic generated by the proposal.

This will obviously delay their decision-making process.

And if they reject the proposal? Then what? :ugh:

[Expressflight]

I suppose it that were to happen RAL would need to appeal the decision.

I don't think there's anything particularly sinister in requiring an EIA, but merely that RDC think it appropriate that one is provided. After all, they have already approved the new terminal plans for which (I assume) an EIA was required.

I see that the Fordair Cologne route generated some 3,600 'pax' during July and the Flybe Jersey route 700 plus. Small fry by most standards, but at least it's a start I suppose.

[tilewood]

Rochford District Council has to be seen to go through 'due process', after all it is an elected public authority.

Southend is a small but significant player in the planned runway
capacity requirement within the South East. I do not think that the
Government would allow it's future to be completely compromised
by local politics.

However RAL does have a growing credibility problem locally and perhaps
within the industry. Having fought hard to obtain planning permission for
a new terminal and railway station, made the necessary CAA RESA
modifications, and publically forecast the announcement of new scheduled
services, little seems to have happened.

The runway length is a constraint, but no more than Guernsey, or London
City, both of which operate very commercially within their limitations.

Let us hope that some positive news will be forthcoming to add
to the successful Ford operation.

[Expressflight]

There certainly is an element of frustration building up within the local community, with word going around recently that 'only' Spanish and Portugese holiday destinations are likely to be on offer. I assume this may be linked with the EMB-195 situation, although it is starting to look as if even those destinations might not be practical with that aircraft.
I am surprised that the Q400 is totally ruled out to serve those destinations - surely it has the range and a reasonable capacity. Does anyone know the relative block times on, say, SEN-PMI for the two aircraft?

One thing is certain, and that is that RAL could not be trying harder to attract scheduled operators - I know that from my recent contacts with them - and they know that summer 2007 is the crunch time. If no services are in place by then, the credibility of their plans must be in doubt.

There is definitely no question of going ahead with construction of the new terminal/train station without a certain level of scheduled services being in place, of that I am sure.

As always, it is the classic 'chicken and egg' situation.

I would disagree with Tilewood that any comparisons can be made with London City and Guernsey - the former has a unique situation and a huge, high yield business traffic-base on its doorstep sufficient to make it economical for operators to tailor their equipment to the runway constraints, while the latter, being an island with large tourist and business traffic potential, means operators have no other option but use it. I agree that both cases do illustrate that SEN's runway is suitable for the viable operation of certain aircraft types, but it simply does not have the imperatives that LCY and GCI enjoy.

[southender]

It's disappointing to see yet another delay in the Airport's plan to become successful again.

I can't quite see what Rochford Council is going to achieve with it's environmental impact review, as whatever happens road traffic in the area is going to increase, whether the Airport is allowed to expand or the whole lot closed down and concreted over with thousands of new homes and factories. Only by leaving the whole site as an open space would there be no impact on the local environment, and we all know that's not going to happen.

Regarding potential routes, I've always thought of Spain and Portugal as being ideal destinations from Southend, given the number of villa owners/timeshare holders/ retired people who live within the Airport's catchment area, which I see extending as far west as Romford and East London. I think this type of passenger should initially be the target of the Airports aspirations before trying to lure the mass holiday market.

In view of this, I have long thought Flightline should try operating services out of Southend to the Med with their 146's, and perhaps now the Ford contract seems to be going smoothly, who knows if they might be considering expanding their scheduled service activity.

Cheers

Southender

[Barnaby the Bear]

There is definitely no question of going ahead with construction of the new terminal/train station without a certain level of scheduled services being in place, of that I am sure.

As always, it is the classic 'chicken and egg' situation.


But what about the plans for the extension to the existing terminal? Will that go ahead regardless? Surely to some extent, its better to start investing in the infrastructure in order to prove the airports commitment to provide for the airlines 'when' they start. However small at first?

:8

[Jamie-Southend]

I have to say i was in the terminal yesterday and it was quite busy, no flights (PAX) but the Cafe area was packed and quite a few people about, so at least its not deserted when there are no movements.:}

[Expressflight]

The timescale for extending/modernising the existing terminal seems to be that upon the announcement of new routes to commence in 2007, the work will go ahead (assuming that these new routes will generate a reasonable increase in pax numbers).

Presumably if Flybe do go for SEN they will do so with a reasonable number of routes initially, say, six(?) and I presume that would be considered sufficient to proceed with the terminal expansion.

If Flybe drop out, then I suppose you could find a situation whereby just one or two routes are opened up by one or more operators, cherry-picking the best of the routes which Flybe would have flown.

Surely SEN-AMS must have potential as it would cater for the leisure, business, interlining and tour markets. Any thoughts on other likely routes and the airlines that would fly them?

I agree that the terminal modernisation should go ahead regardless, but let's face it, if no new routes are inked-in for 2007 what increase in pax would you actually be catering for? I don't think an operator on the verge of signing up is going to be put off as long as he knows that, as his SEN traffic grows, the expanded terminal will be there within 6 to 9 months.

[angels]

Jamie - interested in what you say about the place when there are no movements.

Who are the people using it? Employees? Cargo operators? The general public because the cafe is offering a great deal on shepherds pie and chips?

What are they doing there?

[Jamie-Southend]

Not sure - Looked like General Public, famlies with kids in tow etc and some staff and it was around 11.30 so maybe a little early for lunchtime.

Not sure about Shepherds Pie WITH Chips though :eek:

[aeulad]

How much does SEN interfere with the NWI catchment area? Would this put BE off expanding at SEN?

Initial routes must include the likes of Edinburgh, Manchester, Glasgow, Dublin etc.

Regards

Mike

[Expressflight]

Don't forget that Flybe started talking about routes from SEN at much they same time as they were developing their NWI hub. They presumably did not think that there would be a great deal of overlap at that time.

I suppose if you live in, say, Colchester you might consider NWI as an alternative to SEN but my experience as a traveller is that I choose the departure point that offers me the most convenient schedule and the least likely hassle parking, at check-in and security etc. provided it is within a roughly similar driving distance. If I lived in Colchester I would use SEN in preference to STN or NWI if it offered me the same destination with comparable scheduling.

[angels]

Jamie - Matey, afraid I'm a saddo that likes shepherds pie and chips (with loadsa gravy please)!!

But I'm still interested in the populace you saw. If you see the phenomenon again, try and earhole some of the conversations to see where these folks come from.

It could well be the restaurant. My dad often pops into the restaurant at Shoreham airport because he reckons the grub is good, fairly priced and he can watch the light stuff and the occasional Harvard pottering around.

Back to the thread. Expressflight has a good point. I live in Greenwich which is around an hour's drive away under usual traffic conditions from SEN. I loathe STN (a similar drive away) and if I had the chance of an alternative departure from SEN I would take it.

[Barnaby the Bear]

Whenever I have been in the terminal, its busy with pilots on stopping during training flights etc., engineers from the various companies based at SEN and local people. Not to mention the spotters.
The £4 breakfast is superb!! :}

Just because they don't have many pax flights. Doesn't mean they are not busy. Have you tried calling up on a busy weekend or weekday? :eek:

I feel sure with Southends location within the Thames Gateway etc. it does have huge potential. I just hope the current owners (RAL) are able to attract the business.

I know its no good looking to the past. But correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it in the top 10 busiest commercial airports in the country?

Obviously aircraft size and performance prohibits that again, but as a regional airport it must have appeal. :8

[tilewood]

I know its no good looking to the past. But correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it in the top 10 busiest commercial airports in the country?
Obviously aircraft size and performance prohibits that again, but as a regional airport it must have appeal. :8

No B the B you are not wrong, in the 1960's Southend was one of the
busiest airports in the country. In 1967/8 it processed around 750,000
passengers.

Unfortunately it was run and owned by Southend Corporation, who were
quite happy to be associated with it so long as they did not have to
invest any money, and so long as the profits were stowed away in the
Corporation's coffers.

That lack of investment soon began to show, and the airlines re-equiping with the early jets with their poor runway performance could not operate commercially from Southend's runway, and were then further discouraged by the 400% noise surcharge imposed by Southend Corporation.

If ever there is a book written on how to not run an airport it
will have Southend Corporation stamped all over it!!

[airac]

So things have changed:confused:

[southender]

If ever there is a book written about how not to run anything, or alternatively how to ruin anything, it should have Southend Council stamped all over it!!!!

The airport, the pier, the seafront, the latest bus station, the list is endless.

By the way, I don't think Rochford District Council are much better when it comes to the airport.

Over the years I have collected news items about the airport and it will be no surprise to learn that the negative news from both Councils far outweighs their positive comments.

Cheers

Southender

[approach24]

The Airport has just published a 'Airport Surface Access Strategy' document on its website.
Among the subjects it covers, it states that they expect a major increase in passenger throughput in 2007. They will investigate the possibility of introducing a shuttle between the existing terminal and Rochford station to coincide with the start up of airline operations in 2007.
It also refers to the new terminal and railway terminal and states that work is due to start on the site later this year with a view to opening in 2009.

[Expressflight]

Well, certainly no sign of any denting of RAL's confidence within the 'Airport Surface Access Strategy' - in fact, if anything, they seem even more bullish with talk of a possible 500,000 pax in 2007.

Interesting to note that they are talking of commencing construction of the new terminal/rail station this year.

They will certainly look rather silly if nothing comes of their current airline negotiations.

Getting back to the EMB-195, doing a back-of-an-envelope calculation (not having access to the performance graphs) I reckon if you limited the payload to around 100 pax that should give a range of some 850nm. That would still be an 85% load factor and might be preferable to a tech-stop I would have thought. I seem to recall that PMI was 720nm, although I stand to be corrected. I wonder if Flybe would find that scenario acceptable.

[Loose rivets]

So, it's not like this anymore then?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v703/walnaze/FoxEchotheChippie.jpg

[GBALU53]

Two ex Air Wales ATR 42 are being preparred in Guernsey with there engineering facility.

I am lead to believe that when they are dcirtifie for flight they are going to be based at Southend but operated by Aurigny themselves???

Going a bit off the Channel Islands track having aircraft based off Island.

I do not know at the moment but i do belive they will be freighting most of the time if not all.

They may have picked some contract from Emerald or BAC?????.

[Barnaby the Bear]

I didn't think Emerald were still operating. How about Trans Euro Air? They operate charters. Maybe they are looking to expand. . Are you sure they are not just going to be stored there with the many ATP's sat around Southend?

:}

[welkyboy]

The 2 ATR's G CDFF and GSSEA will be operated in Air Wales colours with Aurigny's crews and on Aurigny's AOC, primararily on charter work using Flightline as the broker. They will be based at Southend and only come back to the Islands for maintenance or to cover AT72;s on maintenance/ unserviceabilty

[Barnaby the Bear]

Aurigny, not interested in a service from Southend? Or would that be too close to Stansted and Gatwick?
Still more aircraft based, and operating from Southend can only be good for them. :}

[girt big un]

I understand that Flightline will "damp lease" these aircraft and market one in the passenger cofig and one in freight config.

[Barnaby the Bear]

Is that not Southend on Channel 4's Despatches programme about Heathrow?
:}

[Buster the Bear]

My information still suggests scheduled services by an established low cost airline from March next year. No lies or wind up, just good info from a reliable source. As we all know, things can change rapidly in aviation. hopefully this good sourced rumour will reach fruition?

[approach24]

Stumbled across a document when I was looking for something totally unconnected with Southend Airport. It’s a report on the Socio–Economic impact of the expansion of Southend Airport and it was published in January of this year and produced by an aviation consultancy for the East of England Development Agency. At 179 pages long, it certainly highlights many of the issues raised on this forum over previous months.
Although the report was obviously based on discussions which took place late last year, among the many subjects it covers is confirmation that a certain airline has plans (or certainly did have in January) to start services from spring of 2007 probably with 2 based aircraft.
For anyone interested in what has been going on behind the scenes re the airports expansion/route development, or even just for insomniacs who need something bland to read, there is a link below. If for any reason the link doesn’t work, type ‘east of england observatory southend airport’ into your search engine and the east of England observatory website will give you access to the PDF document.

http://www.eastofenglandobservatory.org.uk/searchResponse.asp?categoryGEOID=902 (http://www.eastofenglandobservatory.org.uk/searchResponse.asp?categoryGEOID=902)

[Expressflight]

Sorry to contradict you Buster, but my contact on the 'other' side of the negotiations says today that this is not firmed up at all and anything to the contrary is just rumour.

Any comment Buster?

[Expressflight]

A strong indication that Flybe seem to have definite plans to inaugurate additional SEN routes is that they apparently applied for 3 x daily slots at AMS for SEN rotations two months ago.

I don't know if a commencement date was mentioned in this application - anyone at AMS have access to slot allocations?

[tilewood]

Expressflight


Would like to think you are right Expressflight, are you sure it wasn't
AMS/ SOU?

[airhumberside]

I know Flybe applied for 1344 slots at AMS this winter but only got 840. Maybe the SEN slots were ones Flybe didn't get?

[Expressflight]

Yes, I wondered if it might be a mistake in itially, but I checked and it was definitely 'Southend'.

[tilewood]

Expressflight

Thanks for that, and encouraging. Watch this space!!

[HZ123]

Much of the same. Yesterday the local rag also stated that planning permission approved for 68 bed hotel at Sen. This to coinside with the 'games' by which time the airport would be handling at least 20 deps/arr each day. At the present FlyBe do not have the a/c to operate any services thay are hard pressed to meet the current flight plans. That in addition to an article in last weeks Sat Tele. When the Sen M/D was aked about all these happenings he replied it was news to him.

[Expressflight]

HZ 123

If it was "news to the SEN M/D" (do you mean Andrew Walters?), how come that Bruce Campbell, Airport Director said earlier this week that early next year he expected SEN to be handling 1,400 pax per day?

He was quoted as saying this in an Evening Echo report yesterday on the fact that planning permission had been applied for to build a 100-room hotel adjacent to the airport entrance roundabout.

[daz211]

A 100-bedroom hotel could be built next to southend airport, to respond to an expected surge in passenger numbers. Plans submitted to Southend Council include a restaurant, conference and parking facilities on the eastern side of the airfield.
Airport director Bruce Campbell said as early as next year, he hoped there would be a total of 1400 passengers flying in and out of the airport each day, amounting to about half a million passengers a year. In the long term, it is expected this will rise to two million. Mr Campbell said the new hotel, which would be built at the airport main entrance at the Harp House roundabout, was part of a wider plan to upgrade the airport's facilities and transport links.
He said: 'I think it would be a great addition to the region. There is a shortage of hotels around the area. It would be of benefit both to the airport and to the area.'

[Expressflight]

HZ 123

Surely Q400s are still being delivered are they not? That should result in sufficient extra capacity being available by Spring 2007 I would have thought.

Could you also elaborate on the 'Sat Tele' comment - exactly what "happenings" were news to the 'Sen M/D'?

[HZ123]

Well I was there when the question was posed. That aside surely this is just another snippet that may lead nowhere once again. If he is reporting 1400 (Dash 8 - 20 flts s a day 70% load) a day then just who is going to provide the service and to where. Hardly FlyBe they are unable to meet there weekly obligation with most flts being late. Before any of this comes off there will need to be inward investment, not this weeks resealing of the leaky terminal roof. Before anyone starts flying there will be a need for staff / equipment / parking / fencing / access control to the airside. Presently and I do not wish to spoil anyones hopes but the airport is as far away as ever from this goal. The application is for a 68 bedroom hotel and judging by its location will hardly aide access issues which if the airport does take off will create many problems as at present access is rubbish and dangerous. Just look at how many years (30 & 25 respectively) it took to get STN / LCY up and running.

[Expressflight]

HZ 123

I'm sorry, and I don't mean to be obtuse, but what do you mean when you say "Well I was there when the question was posed."

What question? From who and to whom?

I assumed 'Sat Tele' referred to the Telegraph newspaper, but perhaps I am mistaken..... Where did this article appear and what was it about?

I don't see that however long it took to get STN or LCY up and running (even if your timescale was accepted) has anything to do with the introduction of limited scheduled services at an established, existing London area airport.

Pessimism is one thing and perfectly valid, but I think your remarks are way over the top, e.g. access being "rubbish and dangerous" -substantiate please.

[NickBarnes]

to be honest i don't think Flybe will operate to many services as it is fairly close to Norwich Airport

[tilewood]

NickBarnes

Nick Barnes I feel your geography is a little suspect. Do you honestly think
that Southend has the same catchment area as Norwich?!

Norwich is getting on for 90-100 miles from Southend.

[NickBarnes]

sorry yes i was thinking southend was in the north of essex:O no i think it's far enough away from Norwich to become another succesful Flybe base. Sorry about that

[MHG]

Well, i think SEN could start to become an alternative for a considerable number of STN passengers due to the now apparent congestion at STN most times of the day.
Many passengers start to "hate" STN already (me included)
For a long time SEN was at the "wrong end" of London but it seems times are changing as the other London LCC airports (STN in particular) get more congested.:yuk:

What´s missing in my opinion is a suitable connection to public transportation to London to provide acceptable transfer times to London!
Don´t know if it´s possible to connect the airport to the rail network without problems.
The resp. destination Fenchurch Street station would be not bad at all for Londoners AND foreign visitors like me!!!:ok:

[paddyboy]

i was thinking southend was in the north of essex
The clue's in the name...:cool:

[NickBarnes]

:mad: :ok:

[Barnaby the Bear]

What´s missing in my opinion is a suitable connection to public transportation to London to provide acceptable transfer times to London!
Don´t know if it´s possible to connect the airport to the rail network without problems.
The resp. destination Fenchurch Street station would be not bad at all for Londoners AND foreign visitors like me!!!

You haven't visited their website then?

SEN is slap bang on the Southend to Liverpool Street line. 40 - 45 mins to Stratford or 50-55 mins to Liverpool Street.

IF that line goe's tech, short taxi ride to Fenchurch street line.

Rochford station is about 1 mile from the airport, until the new terminal and 'station' are built (one day!) :rolleyes: , a shuttle service would be feasible.

By road you have the A127 or A13 or A130. Ok they are not ideal, but then with a limited amount of parking at the airport and the rail links, the train would be the best bet.

Like you say, EGSS is so busy. Its 4 hours out of your day before you get on the plane, and sometimes 45 mins just to get to your car when you get off your plane.

Roll on flights from SEN!!!!! :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ok:

[HZ123]

SEN also has a runway that is to short so I doubt anything will be diverted there from STN. This is why there are hardly any diversions now with the exception of the odd LCY aircraft. The short runway is the limiter to any expansion which some threaders seem to be unaware of. It cannot service a full 737 or Airbus, this is one of the main rerasons it lost all of its holiday traffic in the 70's.

[Expressflight]

HZ 123

I doubt that many 'threaders' on this topic are unaware of SEN's limiting runway - indeed, much discussion has taken place here on that very point.

It is certainly a fact that when RAL reconfigured the runway to meet current CAA RESA requirements, they had expected to be able to offer slightly greater distances than has proved to be the case in that they had anticipated that B737 operations would be commercially feasible. Despite my fervent hope that Flybe may make SEN a hub, the restricting runway has certainly put something of a spoke in the wheel as the EMB-195 will be significantly performance limited - perhaps so much so as to make it's operation at SEN impractical.

SEN are now trying to make a virtue of the short runway by suggesting that it will protect regional cariers' routes from predation by the likes of Ryanair. True, but only useful if the regionals' aircraft themselves are not excessively payload limited as well.

That's one of the reasons I stated in my last post that "pessimism is one thing and perfectly valid", so how about also answering the questions I posed you in that posting for our general enlightenment?

[alangirvan]

Protect the regional airline's routes? Would SEN have its own catchment area? If SEN management is promoting a 45 minute train connection from Liverpool St, the catchment area will include anyone in Central London who wants to travel and is considering travel through LHR , LGW, LTN and STN. So Dash 8-400s would be competing against jets on all major routes.


Perhaps the market for SEN would be all the smaller French towns which Buzz used to serve - places within 300 miles of SEN.

[Expressflight]

Well, SEN naturally does have its own catchment area which I would define as those who live within the same travelling time from SEN as they do from the other London area airports (including time spent being bussed from their remote car parks), plus those who wish to avoid the ever increasing hassle at those other airports. That should amount to several million potential customers I would have thought. The proposed rail station only serves to increase that market even further surely? As Barnaby the Bear says, "the train would be the best bet".

I'm not sure that flying on a Q400 as opposed to a B737/A319 features particularly highly on the average person's priorities - unless there is a choice of competing carriers from the departure airport itself. This is exactly RAL's point on this - Flybe (or whoever) isn't at risk of establishing a Q400 route only to find that Ryanair/Easyjet muscle-in with a 737/A319.

I agree entirely with your suggestion that routes to 'niche' destinations such as Caen should have good potential from SEN as that would automatically attract pax from other London airport catchments which do not serve those destinations at all.

[Barnaby the Bear]

Exactly right Expressflight. I was in no way suggesting SEN is going take flights from EGSS. But for domestic and Europe, could easily provide a good 'alternative' to the busier London airports with any one of the Turbo prop carriers out there.
Ask the majority of people in the Southend area who is frustrated by travelling to EGSS, EGGW, EGKK ot EGLC with EGMC on the doorstep. The answer is very common.
The bofins would have calculated the 'real' catchment area of Southend, and it wouldn't feature so highly with the East of England Development agency, and the Thames Gateway if it was not with potential.
Money needs to be spent clearly. But I would imagine thats subject to an operator saying yes.
There has been so much talk of something happening, and its now is a case of waiting to see what develops. If nothing it seems like a huge waste of potential.
Plus I want to park for free at my rele's. Cheaper and quicker than EGSS as I said. :} :} :} :ok:

[GBALU53]

In the days of Channel Airways and after them British Air Ferries there must have been the a lot of people travelling from Southend so where are they or there reletives now going to Gatwick Stansted or even London City and paying a lot to get there when there is a perfect airport on a lot of people door step.

We cannot turn the clocks back but if airline like Flybe are trying the local authorities should give as much support as possible as it effects a lot of people not onlt the traveling public but the airport workers.:ok: :ok:

[jabird]

The situation with the E195 seems unfortunate, but can it be resolved?

How many airports are there which either:

a) Don't have a long enough runway themsevles to handle 737 / A319s
b) Don't have a large enough market to warrant the 3x weekly 737-800s that FR seem to be experimenting with - think all of U2's local hops are still daily+ from London?
c) Don't want to beaten into the ground by the more aggressive locos, but aren't sufficiently important hubs to generate regular scheduled links into LHR or LGW?

Flybe have always done well into France, so why couldn't SEN match many of their SOU routes? What are the ATC issues at SEN compared to other London airports - this seems to be something LYX was selling itself on, but SEN seems more able to tap in to a ready market.

I doubt that France alone would make a viable case for an airport. Let's not forget the UK too - certainly SEN-BHD could be much more attractive than STN-BFS if the timings were good (not just 2X daily like AB's STN-BHD).

Must be a few corners of the UK which can't get into the other London hubs because of slot restrictions - DND, Carlisle, Isle of Wight, Scottish Highlands & Islands, etc. Then add in places like BRN, and maybe a few niche markets in Germany & Scandinavia. Make a good offer to RE to move over from LTN........

It seems utterly bizarre to be talking about what is effectively going to be London's 7th international gateway, but I think there is a niche here which the other airports are either too congested or too expensive (LCY) to fulfill.

[Expressflight]

There looks to be only one possible way of increasing runway distances at SEN.

The runway itself is unextendable due to the location of Eastwood church at the S/W end - it would itself intrude into the Runway Strip. It does look, however, that if the present Runway Strip could be extended by just 90 ft (up to the wall of the church in effect) it would then be possible to have a greatly increased Clearway, thus increasing TODA on 24 considerably. The present Clearway is only some 200 ft in length as the Clearway cone as it exists would include the church if it were extended from its present starting point. If the Clearway started 90 ft further along the runway its cone would just miss the church.

To achieve the above it would be necessary to include the church graveyard in the Cleared Strip, as well as a small part of Eastwoodbury Lane (this being closed by lights/barriers when the runway is being used for pax departures/arrivals).

I don't know if RAL have looked at this and dismissed it as not feasible (for example, would standing gravestones be allowed in the Cleared Strip?).

If the above could be achieved it would, I estimate, give a very worthwhile increase in TODA on 24.

There also looks to be some scope to extend the Runway Strip at the N/E end as well, by about the same amount, but resulting in only a small increase in TODA due to the location of the railway line although TORA should increase by 90 ft on both runways.

LDA would not, of course, be increased by either of these changes.

A useful plan of the runways, including Runway Strip width and Clearways can be found on the SEN website on the Property page, development land section.

Any thoughts anyone?

[Barnaby the Bear]

:8 Close off the lane by the church, and lay down the tombstones. Or change them to plastic frangiable ones! :}
Surely its the LDA thats the problem? 1285m on 06.

[Expressflight]

You could well be right there Barnaby.

[HZ123]

This has all be done before, hence the short runway as is. There will be no road closure and there is no way the tombstones, church or anything else is going to be moved. Rochford Council put this to bed 2 years ago and anyway the costs to move the church were prohibitive. Much of this has been covered on previous threads. End result despite all your enthusiam is a runway that is to short. Finally as someone who also lives part time in SEN most of the locals and do not know that the airport exists and care even less, on a good day STN is 40 minutes away, LTN 70 minutes and LGW about 90 minutes. I hope that I am totally wrong but its best chance is as a housing estate provided much needed revenue to the Council.

[Expressflight]

HZ 123

You're not related to that stalwart old anti-Southend Airport campaigner, the late Bill Budge are you?.:}

I'm sorry, but it's complete rubbish to say that most Southend residents don't know the airport exists and couldn't care less about it. There is more local enthusiasm for the airport now than at any time I can remember - mainly because Joe Public is more used to flying than ever before and wants his departure point to be as local as possible.

I must remember to contact you the next time I want to drive to STN, LTN or LGW, so that you can tell me if 'today' is a good day or not for the journey. If you were to allow just 40 minutes from leaving home in Southend to walking into the terminal at STN you wouldn't catch many flights as you well know.

There are plenty of valid arguments to be made against the likelihood of SEN's plans reaching fruition without resorting to myth and inaccuracy.

As you must surely know, there already IS the temporary closure of Eastwoodbury Lane by lights/barriers for every public transport movement and I'm certainly not saying that it's definitely possible to increase the TODA on 24: all I am saying is that I would like to think that every avenue has been explored fully before accepting that nothing can be done.

[Jamie-Southend]

Blimey ! Bill Budge theres a name from the past!

I remember my uncle who lives on the Southend Road, Rochford, having Bill "on Board" to get the two RAF Belfasts shifted from the Eastern Boundry, when they were parked there he lost his signal for BBC1 :eek:, they were still there years later, so i guess he couldnt help.

I have to agree with Express, with regard to local residents wishing the airport was better utilised. I regularly transport passengers to STN & LGW and they all comment on how nice it would be to use SEN for shorthaul routes. I cant get to STN in 40mins though :} but can do LGW in 55 ! ( sorry is that advertising :uhoh: )

[Barnaby the Bear]

It is possible to get to EGSS in an hour, EGKK in an hour etc. etc. etc. But it can also take 2 to 3 hours when the more and more frequent accidents occur.
EGLC as we know is virtually full to capacity, with little or no room for expansion. (See reports on selling price of EGLC)
Once you get to the larger airports you have to queue with the other thousands travelling to get through the ever tougher security.
Having a smaller regional airport, on a direct line to London as an alternative choice would clean up. . . . . . . Oh look theres SOUTHEND!!!!!!!
The runway length is a problem for the longer range aircraft, but I am sure it is not one that can't be sorted, without resorting to knocking a church down with a congregation of 25! :oh:
That is for the Bof's, RAL and SRG to sort out.
To say it would generate more income as housing is laughable when you talk about the 1250ish (says it on the board outside) jobs already at the airport. Alot with skills which can only be used at an airport (Engineers, Handling, ATC etc) generating income for the local area and Thames Gateway as a whole.
:}

Some people seem interested..... Don't know how much truth there is in it...http://www.echo-news.co.uk/search/display.var.941222.0.dutch_airline_gives_airport_hopes_a_lif t.php

[smallpilot]

The local paper claims the airport is in Talks with KLM about a route to AMS with Dutch officials due to meet at SEN in October.:D

[Jamie-Southend]

I have just stumbled across the article SMALLPILOT has just mentioned, below is the text, sorry its a bit long, but if i just put a link, it will disappear in a few days on this news site - makes interesting reading.

"Dutch airline gives airport hopes a lift"
By Geoff Percival ([email protected])
Royal Dutch airline KLM could be expanding to Southend Airport with several business flights a day, it has been revealed.
The news of an international airline being interested in coming to Southend is a boost for the airport's regeneration proposals.
Originally, a planned new railway station and terminal building were scheduled to be in place by 2000 and now the aim is for 2012 to tie in with the London Olympics.
continued... (http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/local/display.var.941222.0.dutch_airline_gives_airport_hopes_a_lif t.php#mpubot)
http://ads-delivery1.newsquest.co.uk/RealMedia/ads/Creatives/default/empty.gif (http://ads-delivery1.newsquest.co.uk/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.echo-news.co.uk/news/local/display.var.941222.0.dutch_airline_gives_airport_hopes_a_lif t.php/956908701/Frame2/default/empty.gif/35363838363533653434393030643930)

Southend Business and Tourism Partnership is being asked to back the idea.
The airport's operators have been working with Tony Le Masurier, former general manager of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines in the UK, who now runs his own commercial consultancy, TLM Consulting.
In a letter to partnership members, Mr Le Masurier said: "The object is to establish an operation which will serve the main European and intercontinental destinations through a feeder service several times a day from Southend to a European city.
"Although several European cities would be suitable, the best option is undoubtedly Amsterdam, from where all the world's main business centres are accessible on a daily basis."
Mr Le Masurier said a number of meetings had been held with KLM and the next would be at the airport in mid-October.
He added the company was restricted in future growth in the UK due to restrictions on flights from airports in the South East, particularly at peak times.
He said Southend would be an opportunity for the firm and it was important to put forward a good case for the airport at the meeting.
He added: "We want to maximise the value of our forthcoming meeting with KLM and would be interested to hear from any local organisations which would be supportive of such an operation in the future.
"We need to be able to demonstrate to KLM the local community would use this service so any expression of support, or any indication of likely routes - and even possible numbers - would be most helpful at this stage."
2:30pm Wednesday 27th September 2006

[DarkStar]

The uncomfortable truth for many here is that HZ123 is correct with his comments about the runway length and the Rochford council decision not to move any church, graves etc and the costs were prohibitive.

My view is that turboprop transport is in rapid decline, people want jet transport and as good as the Dash 8-400 is, their days are numbered in passengers eyes.

Also, the comments about Southend residents not caring or being oblivious about their airport is sadly correct, broad brush, yes, not far off the truth.

People look to STN and LGW.

SEN will remain a dead duck with just a limited offering for storage and maintenance facilities unless it gets a decent runway and thereby attract the Airbus family of holiday jets.

[Expressflight]

DarkStar

There was never any realistic prospect of moving the church, it being a listed building and due to the vociferous opposition of its congregation, so the economics of doing so were thus never tested.

Far from being in "rapid decline" turboprop aircraft in the 30 to 80 seat category have never been more popular with VLM recently announcing they are not replacing their large F50 fleet and Flybe stating that it was largely through the excellent economics of the Q400 that they had successfully survived the oil price increases of the past year. In fact, it always surprises me to see so many turboprops at the regional airports that I visit.

The Evening Echo is nowadays very supportive of SEN, something which was unheard of just a few years ago, so there is certainly no excuse for residents not being aware of the situation and I don't believe that they are generally unaware that there is the real prospect of a range of destinations being offered next year.

You say "people look to STN and LGW", well of course they do at the moment - no point at looking at SEN when it doesn't offer any flights is there? I think you are wrong in suggesting that Joe Public would prefer to travel to STN, LTN or LGW to catch his B737/A319 (with all the hassle involved) rather than flying on a Q400 to PMI or ALC. I don't think the SEN-JER route has suffered through not offering jet equipment and the speed of the Q400 means there is very little difference in block times on even a 2.5 hour sector. LCY also certainly doesn't seem to put people off by offering largely turboprop routes.

If SEN is to remain a "dead duck" unless it gets "a decent runway", then a dead duck it will remain as there is no prospect of extending the Runway Strip (it's the 300 m wide Strip which is impossible to achieve, not just the runway itself) beyond the amount I suggested in an earlier post - not while the church remains at one end and the railway line at the other. So, it will be by use of aircraft such as the Q400/ATR42 & 72 etc., plus perhaps the F70/A318 that SEN will either sink or swim. Don't be under any illusions either that SEN will survive by just serving as a maintenance and storage airfield - at the end of the day that will not produce sufficient revenue for survival.

[Expressflight]

The resurfacing of SEN's main apron stars this morning - work that some may feel was well overdue.

It seems that the stand positions may also be modified, with the first row of the the GA park having been withdrawn permanently.

Nice to think that the scheduled services anticipated to start next year will have shiny new stands on which to arrive. :}

It is also reported on another forum that SEN is now KLM's preferred LCY diversion airfield.

[Expressflight]

I have just received an email from a very high level saying that Flybe "has no further plans to operate out of SEN at this time".

So that's the end of that rumour then.

[approach24]

Expressflight

On 4th Sept I posted a link to a document produced for the EEDA by a firm of aviation consultants. On page 44 of the document is a section which reports on feedback re Southend from various airlines.

"we spoke to Flybe , which confirmed it has plans to start a range of services from Southend in Spring 2007, with potentially 2 based aircraft and additional visiting services on a "W" pattern".

Elsewhere in the document reference is made to charges agreed with Flybe

"We understand that the Southend Airport Business Plan reflects initial charges negotiated with Flybe for the first 4 years".

Flybe also state that Runway length is not an issue currently but could be in the longer term.

Additionally, I've been told that a speech to guests at the Airshow, the RAL chairman talked about Flybe coming to Southend in 2007.

If your latest information is true, I wonder what has gone wrong since June ?

[Barnaby the Bear]

Probably Flybe purchasing the EM195 and replacing the 146's. More black stuff required therefore unable to fully load flights to Southern Europe.
They haven't put SEN into their summer 2007 schedule and I note 'at this time' is quoted.
Flybe are the launch customer for the EM195. Its performance on shorter runways is yet to be proven. . So maybe 2008?... Who knows?
Maybe Flybe's loss is another operators gain... Time will tell.
There are other fish in the sea. Lets hope they swim to Southend! :}


I notice on the Echo's website that another crossing to Kent to ease the QE2 bridge is being investigated. A long time away, but all adds to easier access and more customers. That and the proposed Footy stadium, shopping, Hotel and conference centre can only add to the business appeal required to strengthen the previously mentioned KLM talks.

:cool:

[GBALU53]

With only the Saturday service to Jersey once a week in the summer 2006 there heart was not there in the first plcae was it a real schedule or part charter.:sad: :sad:
When the summer of 2007 comes around i am certian there will be a charter service down to Jersey.:ok:
Going back to the sixties Southend had srong connection with the Channel Islands that have now been all but lost.:ok:

[Expressflight]

The extracts as quoted by Approach 24 from the EEDA document serve to make the latest news all the more depressing as, at that time, Flybe obviously envisaged a substantial SEN operation commencing Spring 2007.

So what has happened to cause a change of plan?

Even if the EM195 cannot operate from SEN (these would presumably have operated the "W" pattern routes), the two based Q400s would have supported a pretty viable route network on their own. Were they perhaps not convinced that the re-vamped terminal and/or new terminal would become reality? Perhaps they thought that commencing operations in Spring 2007 while the existing terminal re-working was going on would prove too disruptive.

As I received the information in a private email I cannot disclose the source and can say only that if the sender doesn't know what's going on, then nobody would. Of course, the wording doesn't rule out routes for the future so who knows, but it must be a major setback to SEN's 2OO7 plans - quite where 1,400 pax a day will come from now I cannot imagine.

Incidentally, I wonder if Buster the Bear could confirm that, in this post of 4 September 2006 which stated that SEN services would begin by "an established low cost airline from March next year", he was referring to Flybe.

[Buster the Bear]

Expressflight, this was the airline.

[approach24]

I've just been shown yet another report dated Sept 2006 (and available on the web) by some consultants with a significant section devoted to SEN. Some brief extracts:

On the new terminal and rail interchange;

"RAL has secured full planning consent for the proposed new passenger terminal,which it must act on before November 2006 (and we understand this to be the intention), but only outline consent for the rail interchange. The consent for the terminal however is conditional on the rail interchange opening at the same time asthe new terminal. The train operating company (as well as RAL), however, take the view that a stop at the Airport would only be viable if there were also a new commuter parkway station further to the east (again in the Green Belt), and Rochford are unwilling to support a parkway development".
"But at present, a new terminal is hung up for the ack of a business case for the new rail halt. Additionally, we understand that Rochford DC is resistant to the notion of further loss of Green Belt land for a parkway station"

"There is also further controversy as neither the airports consultants (the most recent specialist to advise on the Airport’s potential) nor reportedly prospective airlines for Southend appear to be wholly convinced that the Airport actually needs either a new terminal or the proposed railway station to achieve its target passenger numbers. The consultants feel that the railway station would have some impact on passenger numbers, but that the targets could be achieved without.
Much more critical, in the consultants view, will be the Airport’s ability both to keep charges low and to offer the financial inducements to airlines needed in the early yearsto compensate for the costs to them of the reduced passenger yields achievable at Southend because of the constraints imposed by the runway length. The Consultants express a concern that investment in a terminal and interchange will make both of these inducements infeasible."

On the EMB 195 and the runway

"There are also difficulties in landing the Embraer 195 in some weather conditions, which is one of the aircraft used by Flybe."

Some of the Recommendations

Further study might be helpful in clarifying some of the issues:


an aviation freight market study could be undertaken in order to fully understand its potential. The consequences of freight expansion, including land take and surface access, should be understood as part of this process;


more detailed study of the surface access implications, and the feasibility, costs and benefits of resolving them, for traffic growth for development scenarios that include freight and more than the 2mppa proposed by the Master Plan developments; and


more detailed examination into the feasibility, and potential benefits and costs, of lengthening the runway (financial as well as non-monetary costs and benefits).
So, the new terminal and rail interchange seems to have hit the buffers and the only way forward seems to be lengthening the runway....haven't we been here before a few years ago !!??
Unless RAL have some unexpected news very soon regarding airlines coming to SEN, it's difficult to see where they go from here.

[frostbite]

Changing the subject for a moment.

Does anyone know what the elderly military bird was, doing circuits around 15:00 today? Too distant for me to make it out properly, but it sounded great.

[Jamie-Southend]

Thats not good news at all...wonder where it all goes now??? :(


"Frostbite" B-17 Sally B departed this afternoon after a brief stay, and a fresh lick of paint.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1120351/M/ :D

[frostbite]

Thanks for that, Jamie. Funnily enough, I thought 'Sally B' but decided it couldn't be as it's not there any more!

[Barnaby the Bear]

There are many reports out there at the moment, written by many consultants. It may seem to be doom and gloom, but planning issues always slow things down. There are ways of sorting these issues out. Southend has massive potential in the short and long term.
Look at the EEDA, Thames Gateway, London 2012,http://www.investinsouthend.co.uk, Read the Rochford Councils website etc. etc.
I wouldn't get too down hearted just yet. :ok:

[Expressflight]

I agree with Barnaby.

For a start, a report which concludes that SEN should investigate becoming a freight hub doesn't carry much credence with me considering the runway requirements of virtually all freighters and the fact that most contract freight flights take place at night. What better way to lose the support of your local community.
Incidentally, who published this report and what was its main focus - not SEN presumably?

Let's also forget this red herring about runway extensions. Other than the possibility of a bit of 'tweaking' (along the lines I suggested in an earlier post) SEN is going to have make do with its present configuration. Any suggestions otherwise only serve to muddy the waters. Minds need to be concentrated on attracting operators whose equipment is suitable for operation from the present runway, as is RAL's present strategy.

Let's wait to see what results from RAL's present negotiations before writing off SEN's prospects.

Nothing in that report changes the present situation, although a decision obviously needs to made sooner than later as to whether construction of the new terminal is to begin or whether a better short term solution might be to redevelop the existing terminal in line with the planning application recently lodged with RDC. Either option is likely to at least keep potential operators on board.

[approach24]

The report in question was published on behalf of "Renaissance Southend" and the section on SEN is just part of the overall report. You need to bear in mind that the small extracts I posted clearly don't put things in the same context as if you were reading the whole section related to SEN. The report also uses many of the observations made in the report produced for the EEDA earlier this year and one of the main issues both reports highlight is that RAL are going to struggle to fund both the construction of the new terminal and railway interchange and also keep charges low enough to attract operators.
I agree that turning SEN into a freight hub is an unlikely proposition, but it is actually linked in the report to their discussion on lengthening the runway;

"Runway lengthening would see an additional 150m added to the runway to take it up to 1800m. Land required for the extension is in the possession of Southend Borough Council but extension would entail closing a road and moving a church. There are also significant cost issues. Efforts previously to find an acceptable option for lengthening the runway have not proved successful. A longer runway, however would open up very significant new possibilities for the Airport, principally":



passenger expansion: Significant further growth in passenger numbers appears possible if the runway was lengthened. Larger low-cost carriers such as Ryanair and Easyjet and chartered flights might be attracted. The Airport’s retained consultant has suggested that growth up to 4 or 5 mppa might be possible,assuming that Stansted’s proposed Runway 2 was not opened. (However, Ferrovial, the new owners of BAA, have said that BAA’s development plans will be adhered to)and

freight expansion: There might be possibilities for significant growth in the freight industry. The Airport’s retained consultant has suggested that organisations such as TNT, UPS and Parcelforce might be interested in running some operations out of the airport. There could be significant additional job effects if the freight industry was to grow.
So, despite highlighting all the problems associated with lengthening the runway, they take the view that it's worth another look....will it happen, - can't see it myself.
The report does actually highlight that SEN is an assett to the town, but concludes;

"The main benefit is that in time Southend’s economy may develop the capacity to take
advantage of the Airport – and may be unlikely to develop this capacity without it, not
withstanding the availability of air services within an hour’s travel (Stansted, Luton and
London City)".
.

[GBALU53]

Which Company at Sothend is involved in getting this boeing 707 back flying

[Barnaby the Bear]

Just to add to my last post, if you read Flight this month it states that the turbo prop regional market is booming. This is likely to be SEN's target. EGLC is bursting and SEN is the most likely airport to take the increasing demand in that sector. The turbo prop market is ideal with SEN's existing runway configuration, not ignoring the increasing coporate sector. :}

Which Company at Sothend is involved in getting this boeing 707 back flying

QANTAS heritage I believe has been mentioned

[mary_hinge]

Which Company at Sothend is involved in getting this boeing 707 back flying

QANTAS, ATC Lasham and Air Livery.:ok:

[Barnaby the Bear]

http://http://www.southendairport.net/Master%20Development%20Plan%20REV%20C%20.pdf (http://www.southendairport.net/Master%20Development%20Plan%20REV%20C%20.pdf)

Using the above link from the Airport website. I was wandering why the threshold at the 06 end is displaced so far? Is it because the road at the end is not permanantly closed? Or again is it the church?
Clearly if the cone at the end was further up, the church would be in this area making physical extension difficult. But surely there must be a way of decreasing the runway displacement, thus gaining at least a some extra useful landing tarmac?
Any thoughts or technical insights? :8

[Expressflight]

To answer the second part of Barnaby's query first, the Clearway cone starts from the end of TORA. This point is defined as 60m in from the end of the Runway Strip. If the cone was extended from the current end of TORA then it would, indeed, include the church.
However, if the Runway Strip (not the actual runway) could be extended slightly as I suggested, the Clearway cone would start from further S/W along the actual runway and would thus miss the church.

As far as the displaced threshold is concerned I had always assumed that it was the road which required this and that when the road could be temporarily closed (as is now the case) that this would have resulted in the threshold being moved S/W somewhat. I was surprised when this did not happen so assumed that it must be the church which is the limiting factor. Indeed, if you look at CAP168 Chapter 4.3 you will see that the church falls within the Approach Surface (fig 4.5) BUT it falls within this surface wherever the threshold is located so I assume there must be some form of dispensation from the CAA for this obstacle. On the face of it, it would appear to be slightly safer if the threshold was further S/W as a landing aircraft would then be very near its touchdown as it passed by the church and, naturally, more precisely aligned with the runway.

I don't know for certain if the above are the facts but I'm sure RAL would have made every effort to have the threshold relocated if possible.

[frostbite]

I find it a little odd that that pair of s/d houses at the end of the runway are still standing.

They have (both, I believe) recently come up for sale, and appear to have been sold to new residents rather than sold for demolition.

Surely, they would figure more highly in any future extension, being directly in line as opposed to the church which stands to the side?

[Expressflight]

That's a good point concerning those two houses.

I see on the aerodrome chart that they are 32 feet above airfield elevation and, as Frostbite says, they are marginally closer to the runway extended centreline than the church (although not actually directly in line). I wonder if they are the limiting factor as to the displacement of the threshold.

I shall try to find out.

[Barnaby the Bear]

They have (both, I believe) recently come up for sale, and appear to have been sold to new residents rather than sold for demolition.


The new residents will probably complain about the noise. Unless someone else has bought them! ;)

As far as the displaced threshold is concerned I had always assumed that it was the road which required this and that when the road could be temporarily closed (as is now the case) that this would have resulted in the threshold being moved S/W somewhat. I was surprised when this did not happen so assumed that it must be the church which is the limiting factor.

I don't suppose you remember the declared distances prior to the RESA works? Like you say, seems a tad strange after they moved the ILS and flattened the ground to produce the RESA.

[Expressflight]

Yes, I do know the pre-RESA distances:

24 LDA 1454m (now 1399m) a reduction of 55m
06 LDA 1375m (now 1285m) a reduction of 90m

The 90m reduction on LDA for 06 is accounted for by the fact that the last 90m of the paved surface has become the 90m RESA (90m being the very minimum length of RESA to meet CAP168 regulations). This means that the threshold for 06 remains in exactly the same position as pre-RESA. When you think of the type of traffic that used SEN pre-RESA, these reductions in LDA don't seem exactly momentous.

I'm sure that the church does have some bearing on the displacement of the 06 threshold and it has been suggested elsewhere that to enter discussions with the CAA on the subject might open a can of worms. RAL may wish to avoid a situation where the CAA look afresh at the whole subject of the effect the church has, only to find that they decide the threshold should be even further displaced! I don't know this to be true, but it's a possibility I suppose.

Just to clarify the debate as to whether or not the future lies with turbo-props or jets in the regional market, it is a fact that there are now more turbo-prop regional airliners in service than at any time in the past 20 years. It is also a fact that turbo-props outsold jets in the regional airliner market for the past two years and that the ATR42/72 order backlog is so great that an aircraft ordered today will not be delivered until 2088/2009. Let's have no more talk of the turbo-prop being on the way out any time soon.

As far as SEN's runway distances are concerned, all turbo-prop regional airliners can operate virtually unrestricted - they can certainly depart SEN with a greater payload than from LCY - so all of that market is open to RAL's negotiators. Add to that the regional jets that can also operate at near maximum weights, such as the A318/F70/EMB135,145,170 & 190/146, and that offers an even greater potential.

Lastly, it is not out of the question to operate IT routes with larger aircraft by routing via, say, MSE or BOH, on a split load basis. Places such as MSE might welcome additional destinations. In that way both TOW and LW at SEN would be reduced significantly making SEN's declared distances usable. After all, such operations exist now from other UK airports and in the past Air Malta used to operate from SEN via EMA I seem to remember.

It is obviously a blow that Flybe have revised their plans, not least because so much was expected of them, but it might have the effect of heightening the interest of other regionals who will now have a clear run in the market for the time being at least.
So let's not get too pessimistic at this stage and wait to see what emerges from RAL's current round of negotiations.

[HZ123]

Once again yesterday (Saturday 14th) the area leading into the business park was solid for several hours with the traffic attempting to get into the retail park and McD's. As I have stated before this in itself would create a problem for SEN as current access is poor from whatever way you seek entry. There has been much writ about the runway which is a problem despite the most optimistic view.

Finally RAL are a minor player in the business and without being rude they have little apparent experience at deveolment / operations at a full time airport. How will a relatively small company in a dificult business environment raise the sort of sums that have been mentioned and even if they are overstated the sums still require large loans and sustainable returns. The company does not have a track record in this discipline and I question whether they have the required skills for such a development. Only time will tell but the clock has been ticking away surely for to long and as I recall 'Darkstar' commented that the airport will remain as it is serving few passengers and hopfully its active aircraft services and maintainence.

[Expressflight]

I'm sure that HZ123 is quite correct when he says that road access to SEN can get very congested and sharing the entrance with a retail park is not ideal. No doubt the problem is proabably at its worst at weekends for that very reason. But SEN is not alone in having road access problems. Luton currently has such a problem in that regard that it is suggested that corporate jet operators are looking at alternative airports of arrival (Southend?:ok:). Bristol has a similar problem yet copes with several millions of pax per annum, so while it may cause difficulties let's keep it in proportion.

I also agree that RAL are in something of a bind at the moment. Do they begin work on the new terminal IAW the planning consent, or do they implement the expansion of the existing terminal? Or, indeed, do they do nothing until they have some operators on board and can more accurately predict the sort of revenue they will be generating? I suspect that, sadly, the last option will prevail for funding reasons, and RAL have not yet submitted the Environmental Impact Assessment that RDC have insisted upon when considering the application for the expandsion of the existing terminal. I would have thought they would have speedily drawn up and submitted this if they really wanted to press ahead with the work. I suppose they can at least say to the likes of KLM "well, you will only have to use the existing facilities until we get the go ahead for the expanded terminal."

Mind you, how on earth do you rebuild the whole terminal while it has hundred of pax per day passing through it, as will inevitably be the case?

Let's just see what happens between now at the end of the year and if any new routes are actually forthcoming for 2007.

[Barnaby the Bear]

Been very quiet recently. Any news? With the deadline for local business to show interest in AMS routes past, any developments there?

[HZ123]

There has been nothing in the local rag this week and there is a general air of winter depression at the airport. This will get worse when the 707 departs next month and the Belfast soon after that. They keep moving the Shorts 360's around.

[Expressflight]

It is not now expected that there will be any route announcements before next year, contrary to what RAL had anticipated to be the case.

They are still in negotiations with carriers but it seems that one of the main contenders may be in a period of consolidation for the first half of 2007 rather than expansion, so this has put back their plans.

I don't know the state of play regarding KLM, but presumably the meeting planned for October has taken place.

It looks as if the Flybe JER service will not operate as a schedule in 2007 (if at all) as it is not on their timetable and SEN has been deleted from the route map. I note also, incidentally, that the JER service from NWI for next year is reduced from 5 x weekly to 1 x weekly.

I would have thought the departure of the 707 and Belfast is good news as it frees up parking space for 'active' traffic.

By the way, does anyone know if the recent apron resurfacing was a proper renewal of the apron surface or just a patching-up exercise, as has been done previously?

[HZ123]

The surface, signage and markings look to be a good job. As for the idea of freeing up parking space there is plenty of it. The only problem is that many of the aircraft that arrive are eventually parted out. 2007 looks to be another bleak year, I can say with confidence that even the flying clubs have been quite this year and helicopter training has reduced from 4+ aircraft to 2 only and not evry day.

[frostbite]

I have noticed that Southend appears to be lacking in what I would have thought was pretty basic equipment:-

It does not have secondary radar.

It only has ILS on 24.

Does this hold back prospective commercial operators, or is it not particularly significant?

[Expressflight]

How about the rumour that Andy Janes is setting up a new airline at SEN early 2007 with part of the old Emerald fleet of ATPs and 748s as reported on the NWAN forum?

[Expressflight]

Southampton doesn't have ILS on 02 either and it doesn't seem to hold them back. The OCHs are much the same at SEN and SOU for the non-ILS runways - about 460ft I think.

[GBALU53]

Do they need it, Thames Radar has good cover,how much radrar control will they be expecting to do if they can get the traffic.

When Southend was in its hay day i dont think secodary had been heard of?

Bring it on, bring back the likes of B.A.F. and Channel Airways thats the days when there was life a Southend.

[AlanM]

Do they need it, Thames Radar has good cover,


Please tell me how you came to that conclusion!

What radar do we use then.....?? :)

[boredcounter]

Worked for National Airways in the 80's
Great low load, small a/c base that worked really well.
SEN still has fantastic potential, it is just finding the right niche market. Despite being surrounded by water, London and it's East catchment is there for the taking, BRU, CDG, CGN, DUS. LHR, LGW, STN all getting congested from the trvellers point of view, right aircraft type, right destinations, (not the CI's) and off you go, sure of it. City breaks at the weekend. Domestics, all North of the border.
The market has changed since 89, and so have the regulations. Still love to see SEN find its niche. SD36 would work well, if the punters would accept it in exchange for 3-4 hours extra at home.

[Expressflight]

The flying clubs and helicopter training may have been quieter this year, I don't know, but total aircraft movements for the first 8 months of the year are up 2% so other types of traffic must have seen an increase.
Of course, it's rather a joke that SEN has seen the fastest growing pax figures in the country for the past 4 months which only goes to show the low base they are starting from - and that you should never put your trust in statistics :) .

[frostbite]

I listen to ATC most days, usually during 'office hours', and I would guess that, depending on wx, the takeoffs/landings/touch & go average at least every ten minutes during those times, with plenty of activity at some other times. There is also a lot of FIS and RIS transit traffic.

Granted, most of it is light aircraft/helicopters, and I don't know the fees, but I would have thought that revenue stream would provide a useful operating income?

[southender]

Pretty active at Southend yesterday evening.

Between 19.00 and 21.15 there were at least two dozen movements. True, a good number were down to a couple of light aircraft doing touch and go's but there were also a number of other flights.

Arrivals from Flightline, Watchdog, Highfive (whoever they are) and a foreigner who was totally indecipherable to me and a Monarch departure.

Tailed off after 21.15 though.

Apologies for the anorak report, but Mrs S was out and being bored, out came the scanner.

Cheers

Southender

[Foxy Loxy]

Southender,

For info, the callsign is "High Tide"(!) Operated by Trans Euro Air, based at Southend.

Foxy

[boredcounter]

Is that Andy Gr***s Lot, with the Benneton BE90 freighter?

[Foxy Loxy]

That's them - only we call it the lego aeroplane!

Foxy

[boredcounter]

LOL, I like it very much :D

[Expressflight]

I wonder if Flybe's take-over of BAConnect could have any positive results for SEN?

Two years have passed since they expressed the (provisional) intention of opening a hub at SEN similar to that at NWI, but this seems to have stalled in recent months. Whether this was due to distractions elsewhere or the fact that the E195 cannot operate economically from SEN I don't know, but they obviously thought, at one point anyway, that a viable operation could be established at SEN.

Flybe say in their press releases that the acquistion of BAConnect will enable them to "bring forward their growth plans by two years" and they also say that their "new commercial plan envisages the opening of new bases", with these being announced by the end of December.

I heard from a very reliable source last week that SEN's best prospective airline, while still interested and in still in discussions with SEN have had their priorities shifted and are unlikely to be in a position of making major expansion announcements before 2007. Could that be Flybe I wonder?

[southender]

Foxy,

Thanks, must get my hearing checked.

Cheers

Southender

[Expressflight]

I have been have told today that Flybe are considering SEN as a hub once the integration of BA Connect is completed, this having put other considerations on temporary hold.

While their provisional plans will not be actioned immediately, I have been told that the SEN project has by no means been abandoned and, while they cannot guarantee SEN will become a hub of Flybe, it will be considered in depth once the BA Connect integration is complete.


It comes as a relief to know that the E195 performance problem at SEN has not killed-off their interest and things surely now look a little more hopeful than for some time.

[Barnaby the Bear]

SOUTHEND UTD 1 MANCHESTER UTD 0
I take it SEN played host?

[bravo 4 golf]

indeed they did .Flightline BAe146-300 G-FLTC brought the team in this morning and day stopped . Aircraft departed at 2315 for MAN with Sir Alex and the boys.

[boredcounter]

Te He He as the FLT overflew.
Smaller, Cheaper, Less well visited ...................................... 1
Expensive, European, Over visited ...................................... 0
Tilson for Aport Manager at Freddie Eastwood International Airport!
Sorry, back to the thread, could not resist.
Bored,
A shrimpers and EGMC fan:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

[southender]

The Echo reported yesterday that Bulldozers have started the preparatory work for the construction of the new Southend Airport railway station.

However, before we all get too excited it appears the work is starting only to ensure the planning permission is retained.

The period during which work had to start expires at the end of this week and as there are still a number of planning issues to be resolved the bulldozers moved in.

The main stumbling block, apart from generating enough air traffic to warrant a new station, appears to be the requirement for a commuter car park to be built on green belt land, which Rochford District Council and the local residents are not too keen on.

It appears that legally not a lot of work needs to be done to ensure the planning application remains valid, so probably the bulldozers will be gone by next week and we can relax again in the knowledge that the status quo will be maintained for the forseeable future.

At least the intention is still there to build the new station, but if it ever gets built is another matter.

Cheers

Southender

[niknak]

As far as the railway station is concerned, I don't think it will make a lot of difference.
I made a few enquiries, and it transpires that, in the majority of cases, where a railway station at or adjacent to an airport which wishes to be associated with it, the airport authority has had to fully fund the station development costs and pay an abitary fee for each passenger using that station.

The vast majority of Southend's passengers will be arriving by car, not rail and that would be the case if they had twice the current throughput of passengers.
I simply cannot see the justification for a station at the airport.

[HZ123]

Southender is spot on the rumours rumble onwards and it is also reflected in much of the seafront areas, also the subject of grand plans for marinas and 16 storey blocks of penthouse flats. SEN will take another dip soon when the 707 / Belfast depart. The only sucess story is 'Fords' and for the life of me with modern tech it is amazing that emplyees need to be ferried on a weekly basis. There is a thread on 'Cargo' about a new operator with 2 Shorts 360's and do not forget the work ATC / Flightline Eng bring in.

[boredcounter]

Remember, there are types, routes and economics that WILL work through SEN, with or without the station, most with...............

[Expressflight]

As far as the railway station is concerned, I don't think it will make a lot of difference.

The vast majority of Southend's passengers will be arriving by car, not rail and that would be the case if they had twice the current throughput of passengers.


Don't forget that a lot of passengers will actually be arriving by AIR from Continental points of origin. Many of these pax will welcome a rail alternative into central London, rather than face hiring and driving a car with the steering wheel on the wrong side or a slow coach journey.

As an expat who has, I'm afraid, rather gone native it would seem totally bizarre to a Frenchman not to take advantage of an adjacent railway line that goes direct to the city whose name you are promoting. What's more, it would all be up and running within a couple of years, fully supported by the regional, local and commune councils. Vive la difference!

[frostbite]

Fair enough about rail travel being desirable, but Rochford station almost adjoins the boundary of the airport, so I can't see it would be any great hardship to make use of that.

[Expressflight]

Fair enough about rail travel being desirable, but Rochford station almost adjoins the boundary of the airport, so I can't see it would be any great hardship to make use of that.

Which would you prefer?

1) Lug your cases outside the terminal, wait for the bus, drag your cases onto the bus, spend 10 minutes getting to Rochford Station (it must easily take that long at most times of day), lug your cases off the bus and into the station, buy your ticket then carry your cases over the footbridge to the 'up' line, then wait for the train.

2) Take your trolley direct onto the platform of the airport station, after buying your ticket in-terminal, then wait for your train (without having to cross the line).

If an airport station wasn't feasible then, sure, have a shuttle bus to Rochford Station. But as it is perfectly feasible then why make a simple transport interchange unnecessarily time consuming and hard work?

[Jamie-Southend]

Exactly what i was thinking Express.

[GBALU53]

An e-mail received this afternoon stated the long Boeing 707 resident now of QANTAS will be on its way to the Channel Islands on Monday time unknown at the moment

The aircraft will be flying around Jersey with a practice approach and go-around and depart to where i do not know at the moment.:ok: :ok:

[approach24]

I've been told by 2 seperate (well placed) sources that the airport authorities are considering laying a completley new runway ( I assume parrallel to the existing runway ).

As a result of this, I've also had a quick look around the internet and a found a document which reports on a visit to Rochford District Council on 5th October 2006 (no it's not an old document from 2001/2) by some Essex County Council Officers. It States,

"Consideration is being given to runway extension/realignment which could involve a closure or diversion of Eastwoodbury Lane".

I'm aware that this option was looked at a few years ago and rejected, but I'm assured that it is definitley being reconsidered currently - I assume this may have been forced on the airport management because of their inability to persuade carriers to use the existing runway configuration.

I have no idea how far things have progressed, but would assume that if they are serious, something will be announced within the next few months.

[GBALU53]

Has any one got any news on how the Belfast is comming on this seems to have gone quite in view of the Qantas 707 being imminent to depart to greener pastures??

With the clearout of two more large aircraft and the pending plans for redevelopment going on, will there be some losses in the engineering department to make way for all this???

If only the clock could turn back 25 to 40 years when the Airport was humming with lots of raidal type aircraft.:ok: :ok:

[Expressflight]

I've been told by 2 seperate (well placed) sources that the airport authorities are considering laying a completley new runway ( I assume parrallel to the existing runway ).

A very appealing prospect of course, but I don't see how it would work.

Presumably the idea would be to move the runway South to eliminate the intrusion of Eastwoodbury church into the Runway Strip Width if this were to be extended somewhat. The problem there is that the housing estate (Avro Road is it?) then intrudes into the 'new' Strip Width. The simple fact is that there is not the clear 300m width needed between the church and the housing.

The only real scope for improvement would seem to be the diversion of Eastwoodbury Lane so that the 06 threshold would no longer need to be displaced (adding some 110m to LDA on 06) and allowing a Starter Extension of up to 150m to be constructed for 06.
At the same time extending the existing Strip Width by just 35m (taking it up to the church wall and necessitating the laying flat of some gravestones), would take the church out of the Clearway cone, give an increase of TODA on 24 of some 140m, possibly more.

Thus, the new distances would be something in the order of:

06 TODA 1694 LDA 1395
24 TODA 1731 LDA 1459

Quite worthwhile increases on the current situation, so perhaps there is some mileage in trying to achieve those changes.

[HZ123]

As an S-O-S council tax payer and gainfully employed in aviation I must ask where some of you threaders get your infomation. A new runway is fiction, RAL are virtually brassic, it is a miracle that Ford are there for 3 years as the terminal public areas are a disgrace. RAL would spend there time better attempting to retain the little business they have got. As I have stated before they have little if any experience in airport / aviation development and are a bit part player operating 2 airfiields dealing in general aviation. Much of the present runway has only been resurfaced thie summer and is still far from perfect. Having spent the last 7 weeks working at LGW, that airport is dead as a doornail for long parts of the day with numerous empty stands and is also only 60-75 minutes from the alleged SEN catchment area. I cannot see who will be flying in from mainland EU to SEN and paying twice as much as they need to at LGW, STN or LTN. Whatever spin you wish to put on it I fail to see any LOCO coming to SEN operating turbo props to the EU. The only airline in this field is FlyBe and if you study their fares you will see they are not that cheap at all and having taken on BA Connect will surely be looking to consolidation not setting up at somewhere like SEN.
As always I hope to be proved wrong but these rumours, planning applications have been doing the rounds since 1997 to my knowledge to no effect.

[Expressflight]

As an S-O-S council tax payer and gainfully employed in aviation I must ask where some of you threaders get your infomation.

Some of us get our information from confidential sources close to the action so we cannot quote the actual source. All I will say is that the information I post here is accurate at the time of posting and my recent information on Flybe still being very interested in SEN is 100% accurate I can assure you. Your generalisations meanwhile seem, with respect, to have no firm basis - perhaps you would like to offer evidence that RAL are 'brassic' (sic). It's 'boracic' by the way.
Also, why would an operator from an EU departure point be charging twice as much for its pax to fly into SEN as into LGW, LTN or STN? I can think of no basis for this being the case, but you obviously can so please enlighten me.
Still, at least your posts are consistent - consistently pessimistic.
If you really don't think that London area airports are approaching saturation at some periods of the day, then you must be in a minority of one.
Of course SEN's runway is a problem, but at least there are options which can be usefully explored to improve the situation. Whether it will happen or not is, of course, another question but at least this time it won't be for a lack of trying on the part of the airport management.

[wawkrk]

Maybe a daft question as I am not familiar with the airport.
Is it not possible to extend 15/33 runway ?
Looking on Google Earth it seems to be flat to the north and clear for more than 9000ft?

[Jamie-Southend]

Great idea, that would put me right on the approach path for 15 :D not sure if my neighbours would be so enthusiastic though. :=

I think this was looked at years ago, with all sorts of things being taken into consideration. The NW heading of 33 certainly does not have any obstructions right across to tha Hall Road area, however, remember that someone has only just plonked and large lump of shops, right on the 33 Threshold !

Jamie

[frostbite]

15/33 would also potentially provide a requirement for a lot of cross-wind landings!

[tilewood]

One of the problems with establishing an instrument approach on
the old 15/33 heading is the firing range at Shoeburyness.

In the 60's an application was filed to extend the short runway out
to approx 7000ft, but it was rejected by the government.

[Spiral]

Having spent the last 7 weeks working at LGW, that airport is dead as a doornail for long parts of the day with numerous empty stands and is also only 60-75 minutes from the alleged SEN catchment area. I cannot see who will be flying in from mainland EU to SEN and paying twice as much as they need to at LGW, STN or LTN. Whatever spin you wish to put on it I fail to see any LOCO coming to SEN operating turbo props to the EU. The only airline in this field is FlyBe and if you study their fares you will see they are not that cheap at all and having taken on BA Connect will surely be looking to consolidation not setting up at somewhere like SEN.

Every airport has its quiet moments but as for cost the airfare maybe higher but the cost of getting to southend and then the parking costs at the airport all have to be factored in along with convenience which all make for a better experience than sitting on Londons biggest car park (M25) and then dealing with huge crowds at LGW, STN or LTN.
Come on RAL prove Southend can work.:ok:

[Expressflight]

"Consideration is being given to runway extension/realignment which could involve a closure or diversion of Eastwoodbury Lane".

This information is accurate, although a realignment of the runway is not planned and any changes made would be to the existing runway.
Whether this proceeds to a planning application depends upon discussions with the CAA concerning their attitude to St Laurence church and whether its continued presence is acceptable to them in the context of the changes envisaged. I think all now agree that the church cannot be moved, so if no planning application is forthcoming in due course it can be assumed that the CAA have vetoed the plans.

[niknak]

Extension of the runway?

Who is going to pay for it?

To extend the runway would entail not only the actual physical length, but also reducing the entire length of the runway to 0% slope. This would include the requirement (under current CAA Reg's) to have a minimum lighting system which includes centreline lighting and 5 bar approach lights where a precision approach procedure <ILS> is established).

They are lookin at a cost of £8m or greater for all of that, possibly more. Considering that the only source of income is low cost ops, (admirable but not profit worthy in the short term), unless they have a sugar daddy in waiting, I can't see it happening.

[Expressflight]

To extend the runway would entail not only the actual physical length, but also reducing the entire length of the runway to 0% slope.

Really? Where did you obtain that information? The current slope is only 0.24%, which is much less than at many other airports - NCL for example has a slope of 0.35%.

I don't think I actually mentioned lengthening the runway itself in any case.

A Starter Extension on 06, plus extending the Runway Strip just 30 metres further SW into the churchyard, together with eliminating Eastwoodbury Lane from the equation could result in worthwhile increases in declared distances. I don't think it is possible to extend the runway itself as the required Strip Width could not be achieved due to the position of the church.

[niknak]

I'd be glad to be proved wrong (for the sake of commonsense if nothing else) but it appears that any runway improvements/extensions require the entire runway length to have a 0% gradient - it's not written down anywhere until you get to the requirements of the CAA and therir involvment in the planning process.
As it will not become apparent unil the planning application is reffered to appeal, (which is where the CAA have to put their 2 penney worth in), you won't know about until then.....:ugh: :hmm:

[boredcounter]

niknak

That'll be about every UK airport keeping the same runways, or a lot of happy Civil engineers then. No slope at all involved in 1500m plus of hard stuff? How many decimal places are the CAA working to in your book nn.

[Expressflight]

it's not written down anywhere until you get to the requirements of the CAA and therir involvment in the planning process.
As it will not become apparent unil the planning application is reffered to appeal, (which is where the CAA have to put their 2 penney worth in), you won't know about until then.....:ugh: :hmm:

I think you're being a bit harsh on the CAA here and in my experience they are usually very helpful. If you put your plans to them at any early meeting they will give you a frank assessment of their reaction and likely ruling, well before it comes to the local authority planning process. I believe this is what RAL plan to do in order to avoid a pointless planning application being lodged.
In any event, a starter extension to an existing runway may well be judged differently than a full extension to the existing runway itself.
Perhaps you can quote a case where the CAA have insisted on a 0% slope - according to my copy of CAP 168 a longitudinal slope of 1% is allowed for a code number 3 runway.

[Evileyes]

Posts regarding the B707 have been moved here: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=252806

There is also a thread here: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=208377

Please contribute your B-707 related information there.

The Mods.

[GBALU53]

Will it be another sad day comming up for EGMC over the many decades to see so many friends of the air disapear never to be seen grace the apron again the next friend must be the Belfast
If only the clocks could go back a decade or two.:ok:

[Stanstedeye]

Will it be another sad day comming up for EGMC over the many decades to see so many friends of the air disapear never to be seen grace the apron again the next friend must be the Belfast
If only the clocks could go back a decade or two.:ok:

I do hope that the guys at EGMC are getting all these historical movements on film.

[Expressflight]

Just out of interest, with fog having affected all other London-area airports for the past two days, how many flights diverted into SEN? It certainly lived up to its good weather reputation, remaining above minima for most of the past 48 hours.
RAL have recently made great play of SEN's attraction as a diversion airfield, so I assume they were fairly busy.

[frostbite]

I'm listening to tower & approach as I type and they are still busy!

Not been counting but there has been a lot of diverts - so many in fact that they seem to be offering landing and takeoff only, with no handling facilities available due to sheer volume.

About 90% routing over my house, but unfortunately very few visible!

[Jamie-Southend]

Looked packed out to me around 2 hours ago, with maybe LCY diversions, plus more Biz Jets than we see in months, which makes a pleasent change.

Also 5+ large coaches cueing outside the terminal building, if only everyday was like that. :rolleyes:

[tilewood]

A short while ago aircraft were being parked on the central taxiway, and the ATC Lasham hardstanding because the main apron was over flowing.

It's been non-stop all day. No doubt in due course a full movement list
will be published, however some included were:-

VLM
Suckling/Scotair
Aer Arann
Brit.Connect
Atlantic Airways
Darwin
Eastern
and various NetJets etc.

Looks like RAL's focus on Southend as a diversion airport has paid off in
spades today. The staff have worked their socks off, and whilst there
have been obvious delays due to sheer pressure on facilities, it all seems
to have gone very well. Congratulations to all concerned.

[panjandrum]

67 extra inbounds by my calculation today. A very big well done to all the staff, particularly the FBO/Handling and AFS who were working above and beyond the call of duty all day:ok:
Funnily enough , completely flyable yesterday but no diversions at all,despite EGLC being fogged in the AM!

[southender]

Fantastic stuff, sounded busy and very professionally dealt with by ATC last evening.

Reminded me of a report I remember from the Daily Express back in the late fifties during one particularly foggy spell, which recorded that Southend was the only airfield open in South East England but was forced to close as there was nowhere left to park the 120 diverted aircraft. I suspect there may have been some journalistic licence in the the numbers though.

What's going on today?

Cheers

Southender

[Barnaby the Bear]

It could only be good news for an airport trying to attract customers... :ok:

[Expressflight]

I am, unfortunately, old enough to remember that Christmas Eve. It was probably around 1956 and my father drove me past the airport on Christmas morning. I remember there being a couple of Constellations, plus many BEA Viscounts, and a lot of DC-3s, Vikings etc. with runway 33/15 being used as a parking area. I doubt there were 120 aircraft though - more like 40 or so I would guess but it's certainly true that SEN had to refuse any further arrivals due to lack of parking space.

There was a story that, a couple of weeks later, there was still a BEA Viscount parked where it had arrived, so ATC called BEA to ask when it would be departing. "So that's where it is!" was the supposed reply - probably not true but a good story anyway.

Incidentally, does anyone know if a list of yesterday's diversions/re-routed arrivals is available anywhere on the Internet yet?

[frostbite]

What's going on today?


Not a lot! Much worse vis at Southend today - I wonder if all made their 'escape' as there was a limit on rating* allowed to takeoff in <400m vis.

*Not sure if this relates to pilots or aircraft!

[Stampe]

Lydd seems to be doing the roaring trade in diversions today...good for them.:ok:

[Barnaby the Bear]

I agree. They should also do pretty well on fuel sales with those long approach procedures! But thats for the Lydd thread.
:} :}



Continued at: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?p=3038998#post3038998