MP supports finninigley airport

[A and C]

Today at westminster a labour MP for south yorkshire (i missed his name )asked at PMQ,s if the public enquirey into finningley airport could be speeded up.
His main reason for this is that he wants to see more jobs in this depressed area , the goverment seem to be of the same mind.
I just hope that they get on with it sooner rather than later for the sake of all unemployed in south yorkshire and because it will take some of the strain off manchester.

[RAFAT]

Extremely glad to hear it. I am strongly in favour of the airport, so was more than a little disappointed when 'Jabba' Prescott announced the plans would be submitted to a public enquiry. However, it seems that this could possibly be a more favourable option as the main opponents (2 I believe) were planning to press ahead with a full judicial review of the case if a public enquiry did not happen, this could have potentially taken 2-3 years!

Now that Jabba, with his obvious bias, has been shuffled out of the DETR, the enquiry may happen sooner rather than later. The fact is there is support from absolutely every corner apart from the aforementioned 2, who actually paid people to come from all over the country to opposition (FAN) meetings.

[ 11 July 2001: Message edited by: RAFAT ]

[Spoonbill]

:D At last, - an airport which isn't on the top of a hill, has lots of development space, no environmental problems and will probably be a pleasure to operate from and work at. :D
(Probably every reason that the government will want to squash it, {that, and the fact that it'll kill off Humberside}.) null :rolleyes:

[Identified]

By far the best RAF station in the country (when it was open)and Doncaster is a great night out!!

[BEagle]

No doubt if RyanAir were to operate from Finningley, it would be named London (Doncaster) Airport!!

[mariners]

Can someone please explain why Finningley is going to be so succesfull and create so many jobs?, SZD has hardly set the world a light and despite having a runway capable of taking charters Finningley doesn't have any more going for it?

[RAFAT]

Excellent comments guys!! and all completely true.

Mariners - SZD is a postage stamp!! and was only built as a tool to enable the city of Sheffield to qualify for some major European grants. All the buildings, including the terminal, are of a pre-fab type which can easily be pulled apart when everybody loses interest and the place becomes a flying club.
FLY - Finningley Locals say Yes :D

[ 12 July 2001: Message edited by: RAFAT ]

[mariners]

Rafat,
Agree with what u say but it still doesn't explain why Finningley is going to work!

[RAFAT]

mariners - to be honest I don't think anyone knows whether it will or not, we simply have to put our faith in Peel Holdings, and the level of interest they assure us has been shown. Spoonbill's comments re environmental conditions and development space are extremely valid, plus the runway was completely refurbished in 1989 and only had 4 years use after that. Of course there is also Location, Location, Location.

There has been great interest from all sectors of the UK aviation industry: Scheduled, Charter and Cargo. Some tour operators apparently already had Finningley programmes in place for this Summer which have had to go into MAN instead. Additionally, there was a visit recently by the British American Business Council which included American Airlines' UK General Manager. He stated that AA operate 21 flights per day into London but none into the Yorkshire & Humber region, and Finningley would create a fantastic opportunity for this gateway to be established!

I suppose we just have to trust all these reports and have faith that it will work. The one drawback is that the local Council have said they will not fund improvements in the road infrastructure around the Airport until it has been shown that this work is warranted by usage.

[682ft AMSL]

I suspect Finningley's greatest chance of success will be if Peel develop it around the LPL business model, i.e. they anchor it around a low cost carrier such as FR, EZY, or GO.

Mainstream scheduled services aren't going to happen from Doncaster. Regional airlines such as BRAL, Brit Euro, Gill etc are all able to operate a/c into SZD. The fact they haven't done so in significant numbers suggests the industry isn't seeing a significant market for their services in the area. Put bluntly, if you can't fill J41s from an airport on the edge of Sheffield, 2mins from the M1, why will you be able to fill them from an airport in the Doncaster countryside?

Also, don't get sucked in by the reported levels of interest coming from all sectors of the industry. Airlines will always support airport construciton and expension, simply because it gives them more options. Whether they ever actually use the new facilities is an entirely different question. Every man and his dog from the package holiday industry supported LBA in their campaign from H24 ops. Only Airtours have backed up their support with a/c on the ground. Similar story at SZD. Remember the ramp full of 146's, Saabs, F50's on their launch day? Remember Michael Bishop on the same day talking about the tremendous opportunities the airport offered? All of which has culminated in 3 scheduled flights per day, 3 years later.

Airlines are easily persuaded into jumping onto the campaign trail for airport developments. Persuading them to operate a/c in and out of them is a different story altogether.

682.

[AOG-YYZ]

What airports would be the potential winners and losers if Finningly does become a success? :confused:

[TheNightOwl]

Identified:- Two errors in nineteen words! Must be some sort of a record, or Finningley and Doncaster have both changed mightily since I left there in 1979. Two tours at FY, the most miserable ****hole I was ever stationed at!

Regards,

TheNightOwl.

[raitfaiter]

Doesn't Finningley have big problems with subsidence due to past mining activities? I thought thats why the RAF discarded it in the first place.
As for the nights out in Donny....girls in rubber dresses....yahoo ;)

[brabazon]

Quote:

"I suspect Finningley's greatest chance of success will be if Peel develop it around the LPL business model, i.e. they anchor it around a low cost carrier such as FR, EZY, or GO."

While low cost carriers are excellent traffic generators they are not so good at producing revenue for an airport through landing fees. I don't know the deal which easyJet came to with Peel over LPL, but I'm sure it's very favourable to the airline. The airport then has to try to make up its revenue from shopping and parking at an airport. Anyone know how much LPL airport is making from them?

Successful airports have a mix of full-service and low cost (both scheduled and charter) airlines. Will Finningley get such a mix? They've had charter airlines pledging to operate from there, but so far I don't know of any full-service airlines who have said that they will move to it.

Finningley has a lot going for it, but there is current capacity available at Manchester, Leeds, Humberside and Sheffield (ok - the latter is restricted). Should the government allow this development when there is spare capacity available in the north?

[RVR800]

Sheffield is restricted no radar high
ground to the west good connections by
road No GA

The road links to the hill at Leeds are
appaling esp from the M1/62/A1 Fog bound
in winter. Good if you live nearby.
Economy good plenty of corporate business.

Manchester is OK if you live to the West

Humberside covers the East and has good road links.

Another airport may push the others below
economies of scale so what's the point ?

[RAFAT]

Stop Start - The subsidence rumour is a common one, but incorrect. Although there are several disused coal seams running near, there are none directly below the runway, subsidence is not a problem.

[Legs11]

According to information received, Peel generate in the region of £1.50 per passenger at John Lennon International.

[682ft AMSL]

There is certainly extra capacity in the Yorkshire region. The question is will it ever be utilised. RVR800 makes valid points on the limitations of the existing fields (although working at LBA I have to say the 'fog bound' quote is something of an exageration) but these are not the major reasons behind their current under utilisation. The truth is that there is no incentive for airlines and tour ops to take a/c out of Manchester and put them into places like Leeds and Humberside. Pax from Yorkshire have historically always travelled to MAN. The regular scheduled airlines and the I/T carriers know this and have no reason to begin setting up expensive satellite bases at LBA or anywhere else.

This is why I suggested that Finningley will only succeed if it tries to offer something that MAN cannot - e.g. low cost. I take the point that the business is certainly volume as opposed to value, but the market in Yorks is significant and the opportunities to get the volumes are undoubtedly there.

For what it's worth I expect Finningley to get the go-ahead and to operate initially with 1 x AIH based a/c (probably at the expense of some HUY rotations); 1 x BY (ex-LBA almost certainly) + some degree of low cost activity.

Public enquiry is set for 25th September, so we shouldn't have too long to wait.

682

[Legs11]

The enquiry may start in September, but how long is it going to take, and then how long after that before a decision is made? :rolleyes:

[mariners]

Would appear that some more realistic views are now being intoduced. If AIH base a unit @ the expense of HUY and BY at the expense of LBA then what has the region gained !!!.

This is the reason for a public inquiry is it not?

[Rockwell]

Which airports would be losers? We have been down this road several
times last year.

The first to disappear would be Sheffield; Leeds/Bradford would suffer;
Humberside would equally stagnate, while East Midlands would perhaps
level off to a minor degree.

Perhaps one of the biggest losers would be AOG's (Onan on another
day) favourite John Lennon Airport owned by the same (Manchester)
company which owns Finningley. As previously noted a large percentage of
pax at Liverpool originate from Yorkshire and if a low cost carrier
opens up a network of routes from Finningley, why travel to LPL? ( Or is
that LJL now?)

Sorry Onan, Manchester will not lose much, in fact plans are afoot to
entice low cost carriers to MAN anyway.

Brabazon is correct, EZY is the main beneficiary at Liverpool, and
likewise should a low-cost carrier commence operations at Finningley
then a similar deal will most certainly be created.

As noted previously, a large percentage of the revenue earned at LPL is
derived from the airport's car parks, which are in a state of continual
expansion. More income is obtained from the car parks than from the
principal low-cost operator.

[682ft AMSL]

Rockwell: The degree to how much MAN suffers from Finningley is (as with the other fields) wholly dependent on how successful the venture is and what sort of traffic it attracts. With 25% of MAN's traffic coming from Yorks then the airport IS vulnerable should a field ever be evolve to the east of the pennines that is able to meet local demand. Whether Finningley proves to be the answer is a different story, but it is no surprise that MAN has been one of the most vocal objectors to the proposal. Indeed, a Doncaster MP has tabled a question in Parliament asking whether the objections by the local authority owned MAN is a case of public money from one area of the country being used to threaten job creation and economic regeneration in another.

On your other point, I'd be very suprised to see significant low cost ops at MAN. It would seem a foolish move indeed to spend years building up a network of domestic and international scheduled services only to then p**s the likes of BA, BMI, LH etc by offering a low-cost carrier cheaper landing fees and the opportunity to nick all their pax!

[AOG-YYZ]

Rockwell

perhaps my UK geography is a bit rusty, but I would have thought Sheffield, Humberside, Teeside, Tyneside and Leeds/Bradford would be the losers. Surely Manchester with it's international sched status and I think Liverpool would be too far to the west and would also be imune from any impact Finningley might have.

[brabazon]

The issue of which airports will suffer from the development of Finningley depends on the level and type of services which will be offered from it and what the corresponding levels and types are from other airports. Manchester, by the fact that it has a large range of services attracts passengers from a large catchment area. I am sure many people from the Doncaster area travel to Manchester to catch flights if they are not offered from Leeds, Humberside, Teesside or even Sheffield.

So if Airtours who whoever start services from Finningley to destinations served by them from Manchester then they may see a reduction in passengers, but the full effect will depend on factors such as what the price difference is, what times the flights depart etc etc.

We could debate on what reasons people use to choose where to fly from.

I even sat next to a couple flying from PMI to LTN who were travelling on to the Doncaster area to see relatives - they chose LTN as the fare was cheap and travelling up the A1 "wasn't too bad". Their view on Finningley being developed wasn't as positive as others, saying that whilst locals had been used to the noise while the RAF were there, some had got used to the quiet and wanted it to stay thay way.

[Justin Abeaver]

:eek: I see from the NOTAMS that Finningley is to re open from 5 to 12 August. My spies tell me there will be C-130 Fat Alberts, Lynx helis and an Islander operating, incl weekends.
Anyone know what is going on?

By the way, the addresses to write to in support of the proposals at the Public Inquiry are:

Mrs Marcia Dean
The Planning Inspectorate
Room 3/17, Eagle Wing
Temple Quay House
2 The Square
Bristol BS1 6PN

Tel: 0117 987 8918
__________________________________

Caroline Flint MP
The House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA

The Inquiry is due to get under way on 25th September and all papers must be with the Planning Inspectorate 4 weks beforehand, so send anything you can ASAP. Let's be having the old place buzzing again!!

:rolleyes:

[ 20 July 2001: Message edited by: Justin Abeaver ]

[foghorn]

I noticed that as well - there's an ATZ active with frequency 112.1.

There has been helicopter activity at FLY for a while now. A sign of good times ahead I hope. It's a shame to waste a runway so long (just like the shame of Elvington's massive disused runway and pan just up the road which now only hosts car boot sales plus the odd visitor and airshow for the museum).

[Fast Erect]

How can you have a ATZ frequency of of 112.1????
Surely you mean 122.1?

[160to4DME]

Fast Erect

Perhaps post NATS PPP, the next target is the navaids, each sponsored by a different company/group/organisation, with real speech capability.

Morse idents to make way for :
"This is the MCT VOR, sponsored by Boddingtons, the Cream of Manchester"
"This is the Dean Cross VOR, sponsored by Blue Nun."


:D ;) :D ;) :D

[]

[RAFAT]

I think the majority of those in favour of the development realise that freight ops are what will initiate this old girl's resurrection. Not strictly my scene but it's a start. :D

[javelin]

Or alternatively could a large UK holiday company do to Finningley what they did in sunny Florida? - now that is probably why Manchester is crapping itself ! :)

[RAFAT]

Forgive my ignorance, but what's the story there then?

[whizzjet]

Rafat,

Until recently I was MAN based, but I live in the Doncaster area. Throughout all of the summer whenever I drove across the penines to MAN, especially for earlies at 4am, I was in a line of minibuses and cabs we all went to MAN airport but they went to the terminals and I went to the staff car park.

The level of traffic that comes from the east of the country is large and a decent airport this side of the penines wil reduce the traffic at MAN substantially. That is what they are worried about.

Plus MAN own Humberside which will collapse once FY opens.

[chiglet]

AOG, RAFRAT & wizzjet
Ah "Manchester!"
Having worked there [in ATC] sincc 1969..[YES I am a Boring Old F@ft]
I have seen the Airport grow. The "Archetect" was a certain "Gordon Sweetapple", [who used to race his go-cart around the taxy-ways]AND there was one bus per hour from Stockport and only three from Manchester.
Yes, there is NOW a lot of vehicular traffic from "Yorkshire" to MAN.
Why????? LBA is up and staggering. HUM is well....humming.
FACT the catchment for MAN is actually greater than for LHR. [AOG, look at a map for a change :D]
The facts are, Manchester Airport has [in the face of the South, AND the Neddies] made a World wide reputation for itself. YES, YES, and blinking YES it has PROBLEMS, but as a local lad who is lucky enough to do a job THAT he likes, WHERE he likes :D
Nuff Sed!!!
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Legs11]

Heard a good one on the grapevine today, apparently Airtours have invested in the Finningley project.

[BillTheCoach]

"Additionally, there was a visit recently by the British American Business Council which included American Airlines' UK General Manager. He stated that AA operate 21 flights per day into London but none into the Yorkshire & Humber region, and Finningley would create a fantastic opportunity for this gateway to be established!"

Given that I have just returnd from California where CNN/NBC speak of
" Yorkshire's race riots " those comments may come back to haunt the venerable gentleman !

I am sure his marketing department would have difficulty justifying one flight a day from Finningley to the USA without him promising that it is the second gateway to the U.K. ! I am sure Continental and Delta will be wetting themselves laughing at this.

AA's aircraft also overfly Machrihanish - is this another gateway ?

[Spoonbill]

Cmmon Bill!If you worked hard enough at it, I'm sure you'd get the contract to ferry the crews to and from Manch'. :D
Just think of all that loverly loot rolling around in the back of yer sharabang. :p

[BillTheCoach]

Spoobill, I am sure you are correct but it has cost us a lot of money building and installing our patented 'low cloud and fog' machines at LBA !

There aren't any hills to hide it in near Finningley !

[Legs11]

This'll add some fire to the smoke:

In today's Sheffield Star there is going to be an article covering the until now, secret discussions between Sheffield City Airport Ltd and Peel Holdings. By all accounts Peel are negotiating to purchase up to 50% of SCAL.

More on this when I've seen the article in question, but it makes you wonder eh? What could Peel be planning.

Will they close Sheffield down, forget all about opening Finningley or even operate them together. Who knows, but it's all very interesting.
:confused: :eek: :confused:

[foghorn]

The only reason I can see Peel taking an interest in Sheffield is for its staff and equipment. Once they have closed it down they'll be able to drive the ILS, NDB, fire service, airport management and ATCOs (with their unused radar ratings) 15 miles down the M18. All they need to add is a Surveillance Radar and a Class D CTR and, hey presto, they have a proper airport straight out of the box. They could even take the Meccano terminal!

What is the most annoying thing about the whole Sheffield saga is that this is what they should have done all along.

All that European money should have been spent on developing Finningley with a spur road to the M18 and a fast rail link to Sheffield city centre (there's an under-utilised freight line that runs right past EGSY direct to Finningley that would have done nicely). Instead what has happened is good money has been poured after bad at the abandoned slag tip that is Sheffield City doing no-one any good, not least the image of the city.

The city council and developers of EGSY were poorly advised from the outset. They were advised that only a City airport supporting small high-yield flights as close to the city centre as possible would succeed. Hence EGSY's turboprop/146-only runway and congested location just 4 miles from the city centre.

This advice was given just months before the low-cost phenomenon hit Britain and their need for low-cost 737-capable airports with lots of development potential. Oops.

[ 25 July 2001: Message edited by: foghorn ]

[Legs11]

Foghorn, I don't think I could have put it better myself.

The present owners are a property developement company with no aviation experience. Their only interest was getting the land next to the airport to build a business park on, and the agreement with Sheffield council requires an airport until 2006 otherwise the land goes back to the council.

MOst of the staff I am sure would leap at the chance to move to Finningley, although I'm not sure about the controllers as they are with Serco

Whatever happens, it should all be done and dusted by mid-August, so not long to wait.

[RAFAT]

Foghorn - Absoflippin'lutely.

Watching EGSY being built, I often thought to myself - WHY??? can they not see the potential just up the road?

The crazy thing is, our Council Tax in Donny helped to fund Sheffield's Supertram project, and yet they have the damn nerve to moan about the Finningley project.

[RAFAT]

On the subject of 5th - 12th August and the possible temporary reopening of the base, what looked like a Dornier 328 has been buzzing the area all afternoon and into the evening. Any clues anyone???

[Justin Abeaver]

The only thing I can think of round S Yorks is the para Dornier from Hibaldstow.

The NOTAM gives a VOR freq for of 112.1 for the FY tower freq. Someone in AIS or the RAF has written down the wrong frequency. I imagine it should be 121.1 or 122.1 .

Any ideas?

[RAFAT]

Further to Leg11's post, I caught the latter part of a Look North news piece tonight which said that Peel had indeed purchased a stake in Sheffield City Airport. Accompanied by video of a terrible landing by a Sabena DHC8 - the third landing looked nice though!!! :rolleyes:

[Gainesy]

Of interest perhaps, but not necessarily directly linked.
Quoted from Motor Transport (weekly trade paper)

"P & O Trans European has opened a new 14,880m sq multi-modal logistics centre in Doncaster"
"Tim Peet, Trans European deputy manager says:"The location is key to our national and international logistics strategy. It emphasises our commiment to maintaining our position as a progressive, innovative international logisitics service provider."

Dunno whereabouts in Donny it is located, but it reinforces Finningley's already excellent position as a cargo hub.

[RAFAT]

Agreed. The building is near the Yorkshire Outlet, and also the railfrieght depot, about a mile from the M18.

[Justin Abeaver]

My men on the ground tell me there will be Fat Alberts, Lynx and Islanders operating from 5 August.

"The Boys are Back in Town"

:eek:

[ShyTorque]

Looks like the military haven't decided to give it up just yet then!

[whizzjet]

;) Just sounds like the boys are having a final night out in Donny before they have to pay landing/parking fees!!

[NorthernSID]

From 2 tours at FY, IMHO there are only 3 things going for it: a long runway, 4 RAF hangars and a new "Tesco' style building - the 'new' Nav school.

All the infrastructure is 1930s vintage. Most of the roads are barely 2 lane. The access to within 2 miles is good, but the last 2 miles barely support local traffic. There is nowhere that will handle lots of pax.

Nice idea, but without spending a LOT of money, probably impractical

however, best of luck. Hope the investors have deep pockets and don't expect returns soon!

[BillTheCoach]

What are the dates for the public enquiry and where is it being held ?

i think this might be an interesting bun fight to watch !

[whizzjet]

NorthenSID,

My last tour was at FY, the plan is to use the hangars as tempory terminals (just erect a portacabin city in them), while a new terminal is built to the east of the RW.

Then develope the engineering site by demolishing the old hangars, too small for todays stuff anyway, and utilising the large amount of pan area for eng/frieght.

No upgrading of the taxiways will be required unless 747-400 arrive.

The M18 is 1/4 mile fron the current airfield boundary and the old Finningley Halt railway station (Airmens mess)will have to be re-opened.

Other than that it is ready to go (tongue in check).

PS the public enquiry is just a ruse to stop, HUM/Prescott dragging the planning permission through the courts, which would take longer with appeals etc. 51% of sheffield was aquired to shut them up, that simple!!

IT WILL HAPPEN ( Just as I get a job at LHR)

[RAFAT]

Public Enquiry commences at 10am on Tuesday 25th September at Priory Methodist Church, Printing Office Street, Doncaster.

Although the Public Enquiry was initially perceived as a spanner in the works for the whole project, it is now regarded as the best option, as appeals/judicial review applications by those in opposition could have taken up to 3 years to complete.

[Legs11]

The FY freq is 122.1, I heard them on it today.

Peel only bought 50% of Sheffield,but now have the backing of Sheffield and Rotherham councils in the FY bid. Two of the largest and loudest protestors. Should make the 5/6 week enquiry a foregone conclusion and then we can all get on with applying for jobs. :D

[RAFAT]

What is puzzling me though is why Peel have bought a 50% stake in Sheffield City Airport.

[4 of 7]

So that they can close it without too much opposition! If that is their best option.

Buy out the competition is an old and trusted way of ensuring your own way - it even works in some marriages!

[Enigmatic]

No,no,no. You turn it into a shopping mall that just happens to be attached to a runway. :D

[Onan]

Right on Enigmatic;
Just like manchester "an airport with a city attached".

[RAFAT]

4 of 7, is that not just a little too obvious?

[682ft AMSL]

RAFAT: Yes, I think it really is that obvious. Let's face it, SZD is in a dire state. It is loosing over £1m a year and the prospects of achieving the increases in services necassary to stem this outflow seem remote. As a result, SZD would not have been in a position of strength at the FY public enquiry - "Don't give the go-ahead to Finningley because it will rob us of ALL our services and our prospects" is a pretty weak argument in light of it's current performance

With this in mind, the owners of SZD have probably thought we'll take the money, relieve ourself of the burden and sell the deal to the public on the grounds that SZD might ultimately be able to capitalise on the success of FY

Of course, it still means that the objectors to FY with the strongest arguments (LBA, HUY and EMA + MAN?) are still in place.

[overstress]

682:

Historically, West Yorks punters may have travelled to MAN, but the 320s and 321s I have operated out of the nation's highest have always been full...

Is this a tribute to local marketing by the tour operators, or a natural aversity to travel over the '62?

Either way, LBA to Spain/Canaries is always chokka.

[682ft AMSL]

overstress: There has never been a problem filling flights ex LBA – its catchment area is large and the demand it generates is probably no different to that of any of other major UK conurbation. Ryanair, Sabena and Airtours have all demonstrated that when a comparable service is provided, local punters will choose LBA over MAN. As to why this is, I think people will always choose the cheapest and most convenient option. Ok, the last few miles of road to LBA aren’t fantastic, but for a couple of million people the airport is a £20 taxi ride or a 30min lift with a friend / neighbour away.

Of course, the big problem has always been on the supply side – airlines and tour ops much prefer to service this demand from MAN. Whatever is said about LBA w/x, RWY length etc, I think this is primarily driven by economics and for most it is cheaper per head to fly Yorks passengers from MAN based a/c than it is from satellite stations at LBA or HUY (or indeed FY when it gets up & running). That said, Airtours have made a real go of it and are expanding their LBA programme for next summer yet again. However it needs a similar level of support from JMC, First Choice and Thomsons to fully redress the balance.

[dwlpl]

682ft AMSL

I understand Ryanair is to operate only one daily flight this winter from LBA.

[682ft AMSL]

Yep, I've heard the same. I think it is the latest move in a long running game of cat & mouse between the airline and the management. Don't know the exact details, but when FR's contract came up renegotiation recently I think its fair to say there was some "difficulty" in agreeing a new tariff. FR have since gone through a series of measures to demonstrate to LBA that "you need us more than we need you". These have included axeing flights this summer and limiting the availability of discount fares. The further reduction this winter (or possible withdrawal) seems to be an extension of these tactics. All typical of FR with the exception of it not being fought out in public, for reasons I don't really understand.

No doubt LBA wil hoping that BA can improve on their J41 service this winter to mop up some of these ex-FR pax.

[dwlpl]

682ft AMSL

They, Ryanair, also mess around with times and frequencies on their route LPL to DUB.

Maybe its to keep its pax throughput, and also its market share, up on its MAN route?

[Ringwayman]

Is this the same Ryanair that went from 5 daily MAN-DUB to 2 daily MAN-DUB and said that they would add flights at LPL and LBA instead, only to find that the drop in MAN passenger numbers was greater than the increase on the LPL and LBA routes?

That measure was in response to the "high MAN charges". They are now back up to 4 daily.

[dwlpl]

Its the same Ryanair that went from 5 daily flights down to 2 daily flights (so protecting its valuable morning and evening slots) on the DUB to MAN route.

Its also the same Ryanair that was "attracted" back to fly from MAN under that airports special fee package/promotion that went under the name of "New and Under Utilised Routes".

[Legs11]

New and Underutilised routes, now there's a good description of Sheffield. ;)

[chiglet]

As an ATSA at MAN/EGCC I am following this thread with interest
Fact 1 The "bucket and spade brigade" will fill an aeroplane from X.
Fact 2 The same B & S will "quite probably" fill more than one, but less than ???.
Fact 3 XYZ airlines has 5 a/c.
Fact 4 Tour company/Holiday agent/Ceefax whatever fills 4 a/c from somewhere else. BUT can guarantee 55% load from X
Fact 5 I failed maths, BUT....
"Premium" routes, AKA Schedules
Fact 1 LBA/EGNM has NOT got the catchment that they think.
E.G. York. A big city. Do you fly from Leeds, or Tees-Side. Anything to the West of Leeds, it is in fact easier to go to Manchester
Fact 2 The "weather" at Leeds leaves a lot to be desired
I stand to be corrected/castigated/or just slagged :rolleyes:
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Spoonbill]

Chiglet raises some interesting points.
Finningly has a lot going for it, the weather factor being a major one.
The weather at Leeds in the winter/spring is often such that they lose traffic, that said I don't think that LBA management will worry too much about scheduled traffic being lost.
The main revenue under threat from their point of view has got to be the IT traffic, once an operator gets a foothold at Finningly they've got to be a more attractive proposition for IT passengers to the east and south of Leeds.
Obviously Humberside are worrying about the whole development, the opening of Finningly is going to destroy everything that they've worked for, (for the little that they've achieved), I understand that most of the operational staff already have lodged their applications with Peel. :D
As for Manchester, who knows ? :confused:

[Si]

I don't know if this is true, maybe someone might know something but in the Airtours holiday brocheure, in the back it states that in 2002/3 (not sure can't remember) that flights will be leaving from Finningley.

[682ft AMSL]

Chiglet is quite right and essentially reiterates the point that economics drive where the bucket & spade brigade fly from in the north. For a variety of reasons, it is generally cheaper per head to fly a punter from MAN than LBA, whether said punter leaves in Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Hull etc.
It not the case however that *if* LBA could find a profitable way of competing with MAN, that there isn't plenty of potential to shoot at. CWL for example, which solely caters for South Wales, handles over 1m charter pax per year. NCL and EMA do 1.4m each. Yet LBA handles only 0.6m and therfore whilst the catchment area may not be as extensive as MAN or BHX, it compares favourably with these other airports and the potential to double its current throughout is obviously there.
As for the "weather", this old chestnut is simply not the issue here. Look at BRS, almost exactly the same as LBA operationaly, yet handles twice as many charter pax and has just persuaded GO to set up camp. LTN, was chosen by EZY as its first base, and before that BY, MON etc. Also, check out bmi deserting the long CAT3 runway at BFS to a 1800m CAT1 strip down at BHD. In all cases, economics, not operational considerations, were the over-riding factors.

If LBA were prepared to offer loss-leading rates to charter airlines, I have no doubt they'd be here. In the case of Finningley, I suspect Peel will be more pro-active than LBA on this front. If they can persuade BY to move a B757 20miles up the road to LPL to fly exactly the same punters it would have done at MAN, they should have no trouble in getting them to stick one into Doncaster when its up and running. I doubt MAN are "running scared" over this prospect,but no doubt there is a liitle nervousness that FY might become very successful on this front.

682

[dwlpl]

The annual CAA figures for the year 2000 for diversions, they are not split down into the reasons why, state that there were a total 1498 diversions from the intended UK airport for landing.

The top three as follows:
1. Bristol=183
2. Gatwick=154
3. LBA=132

As for catchment areas, LPL's, 38 miles from MAN not 20 miles, is said to have up to six million people who fly from other airports than LPL.

[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: dwlpl ]

[RAFAT]

682, did you get my private message?

[682ft AMSL]

RAFAT : Got it thanks - a reply should be waiting.

[RAFAT]

Good news today, Easyjet have announced their interest in operating Scheduled services from Finningley. Excellent timing the day before the Public Enquiry starts!!!

682 - Thanks very much, info gratefully received and included in our case.