MANCHESTER - 8 [Archive] - Page 2

Nomoresteerage

1st Sep 2010, 14:54

My bolding below

Lifestyle**/**Biggest passenger jet to fly from Manchester THEBUSINESSDESK.COM (http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/58011-biggest-passenger-jet-to-fly-from-manchester.html?news_section=10968)

THE largest ever scheduled passenger flight from the North of England will take-off today when Emirates Airline launches its new Airbus A380 service from Manchester.

The inaugural flight to Dubai this afternoon by the world's largest passenger plane is expected to be almost full to its 517-passenger capacity and will offer travellers with Emirates first class accommodation for the first time from the airport.

Speaking in Dubai before joining the Manchester-bound flight, Maurice Flanagan, the 81-year-old executive vice chairman of Emirates who founded the airline in 1985 for the ruling Al Maktoum family, said he was "ecstatic" at the launch of the service into his native North West.
"Manchester is bursting at the seams, there is not enough capacity and we needed first class seats," said the industry veteran, who was knighted in this year's Queen's Birthday Honours.

He said: "Our two flights a day from Manchester are more profitable than Gatwick which has three flights a day."

Emirates has taken delivery of 12 A380s for its Dubai-based fleet and has a total of 90 aircraft on order from Airbus.

The aircraft feature seats for more than 400 people in economy class with 76 business class seats and 14 first class "suites" on the upper deck along with shower spas and a cocktail bar.

"There is no other regional airport with the demand that Manchester has," said Leigh-born Mr Flanagan, who will become Sir Maurice after his investiture by the Queen in the autumn.

The airport is one of only 17 across the world able to accept the giant plane and £10m has been invested by Manchester Airport Group to strengthen the runways, move back signs and buy a new fire engine to allow it to land.

The A380 "superjumbo" is the world’s only twin-deck airliner and is the most environmentally-advanced airliner in the sky today. It offers better fuel economy than most hybrid passenger cars, and burns up to 20% less fuel per seat than today's next largest aircraft.

Richard Critchley, Greater Manchester Chamber’s transport policy manager, said: "This is a great vote of confidence in Greater Manchester and the airport, proving that the city can compete with the likes of Heathrow for international services.

"It clearly demonstrates Greater Manchester's global connections and the strengthening ties between the city and Dubai. The new plane will provide additional daily capacity, welcoming businesses and tourists with the highest quality airline facilities."

Tight Seat

1st Sep 2010, 15:07

How many seats on the Travel City Direct 747s?

aidoair

1st Sep 2010, 15:46

How many seats on the Travel City Direct 747s?

There was 449 seats on TCD's 747s in 3 classes.

JackRalston

1st Sep 2010, 16:05

Just got home after a superb day at the RVP. There was probably no need to pre-book a ticket as there were a lot of other cars paying then and there. Got into the RVP around 11 and parked on the far side of the extended grass carpark and then joined the 1000s of people that had turned up. Camera crews everywhere and I saw a lot of people getting interviewed.

Superb landing and holding short of the B intersection was a great touch. Me and my mate were as wow'ed as could be but not as much as the BMIBaby that had just arrived when the Emirates was pushing back of Stand 12 and he nearly missed his turning!

Departure for such a huge beast was rather short I must say and also given that it was from JA made it seem even shorter!

A great day out, great weather, great turnout and a VERY positive move forward for Manchester Airport.

A330ETOPS

1st Sep 2010, 18:20

Absolutely, i thoroughly enjoyed it myself up on the hill at 23L. Which runway did it use for departure?

Hamburg 2K8

1st Sep 2010, 18:21

What a great day for MAN and the North West in general. Weather was just perfect for this historic day and the landing from the video's I've just on You Tube was fantastic. I loved the way the nose slowly came down and kissed 23R. I'm so proud to say I played an important part in the A380's development and testing, in Broughton, Toulouse and Hamburg. I couldn't be at MAN today, had to work in that factory were the wings are made, you may know it by the name of Aibus. But will sure be going to MAN sometime this month.
I take it everything went without a hitch? Passengers and crew happy with aircraft, MAN operations etc? Out of interest, what time did it land? I checked early this morning about 6.30AM and MAN airport website said 12.26, was scheduled for 12.25. And departure time was 15.20, think it took off about 15.45?
So to conclude, I am so proud of my local airport MAN and would like to say a big thank you to Emirates for putting their trust and faith into MAN. I'm sure this will be a big success for the airport, the airline and the local economy.

A330ETOPS

1st Sep 2010, 18:31

Let's get more A380 equipped stands and hope Singapore follow in their footsteps haha!

purplehelmet

1st Sep 2010, 18:52

what a fantastic sunny day for the first a380 landing. had a great view on the southside,we could see it miles out turning on to finals.it was a lot quieter on landing than i thought it would be.and looked very impresive on stand 12.ive never seen southside so busy and all the familes seemed to have a great day out.well done all at man lets hope we see a few more airlines start a380 routes from man in the near future:D

bmibaby319

1st Sep 2010, 18:56

And Cathay manges to get in the way: YouTube - Emirates Airbus A380 landing @ Manchester International Airport. HD. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaSxRaJBl_s)

Hamburg 2K8

1st Sep 2010, 18:58

Yeah, why couldn't Cathay land after EK?

ib26uk

1st Sep 2010, 19:53

I went to MAN today - Had a fantastic time :ok:

I stood for the majority of the time on Level 13 - Had a great view of the A380

I missed it landed due to missing my train :mad: but saw it on approach when the train was at Maldeth train station

I did however see it taxi take off and disappear into the clouds

Weather was absolutley perfect today

Well done on this amazing achievement Manchester Airport :ok::ok::ok:

purplehelmet

1st Sep 2010, 20:01

Yeah, why couldn't Cathay land after EK?
a lot of people mistook the cathay 747 for the a380 through the haze as it turned on to finals,a few seconds later the a380 appererd behind it.
someone posted a picture of the cathay 747 in the men, she thought it was the 380:O

eggc

1st Sep 2010, 20:03

I know this is not airliners.net and normally photos don't belong on PpRune, but today is no normal day for Manchester...so to hell with it - here's my favourite shot of it's first touch down on...

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_BS8bZwGruog/TH6pzBFB60I/AAAAAAAADuw/1kL4DXn7bUk/s800/154935279.jpg

HXdave

1st Sep 2010, 21:00

I had a great day today at MAN. watched the EK A380 landing from the top of Olympic house, then watched her depart whilst stood on the apron by T3. Big thanks to the lass that organised this for me, and here's to the next airport visit.......

learjet50

1st Sep 2010, 21:41

Re your cooment why did the Cathy not land after the A380 ?

Why should it it departed before the A380 and therefore should not be held for another A/C without good reason

It was a great day to see an 380 at Manchester and full marks to the Airport for doing what no body thought was possible at a regional Airport but life goes on u cant delay A/C without just reason..

Anyhow how much more ****e would be put into the Atmosphere if you held Cathy for 10 mins The A380 puts less ****e into the Air than the 747

I am glad everbody had a nice day as we said a Perfect day for all concerned

Shed-on-a-Pole

1st Sep 2010, 22:06

Errr ... folks! Reality check! Why SHOULD the Cathay be made to land after the Emirates A380? Cathay Pacific Cargo is one of MAN's best customers and on this occasion their B744 was best placed in the traffic sequence to make its approach first. On other days the opposite will be the case. There is no possible justification for putting regular flights into the hold (wasting fuel and time) to facilitate queue-jumping by a "preferred" flight (except in an emergency). Airports and ATC operators alike must be seen to treat their customers impartially for the benefit of all. Both Emirates and Cathay Pacific Cargo are daily stalwarts at MAN. I wouldn't like to see either of them hacked off by being forced to wait for the later-arriving aircraft to land first. Be careful what you wish for. If you take the regulars for granted they can quickly become ex-regulars. Cargo operators in particular can easily relocate to another airport if they do not receive the level of service which they deserve and pay for.

MAN is very fortunate to be graced with regular schedules by Emirates, Cathay Pacific Cargo and many other carriers. We need to appreciate them all. No second-class citizens. Impartiality is the only way to keep all the customers happy.

NB. This response was prepared prior to the appearance of similar comments by learjet50.

bermudatriangle

1st Sep 2010, 22:34

may i ask why 5-600 passengers will have to walk the lenght of pier B to board or disembark from this aircraft ?? no moving walkway and no comfortable seating area as i recall.
the worlds largest commercial airliner,but certainly not the worlds most convenient parking stand.
maybe some further infrastructure investment is required to make the whole travel experience at manchester a pleasant one.

PQC

1st Sep 2010, 22:40

A great day for MA, EK and all the many, many individuals and companies (NATS, Swissport, Costain, Jetway etc etc) who have been involved in this project. As someone with a connection - but not major - into the delivery of this project, I don't think that the majority of posters on here have any inkling of what it took to get one A380 onto stand 12 today.

I just wonder what Willie Walsh, CX of Heathrow Airways makes of another few hundred northerners proving to him that, yet again, long-haul from MAN is a very, very, viable proposition.

bermudatriangle

1st Sep 2010, 22:47

PQC,the longhaul success for EK from MAN,is because DXB is it' hub,i estimate 90% of passengers from manchester are transiting dubai,to pakistan,india,the far east and australia.manchester to dubai as a stand alone route would be a none starter,
BA operate about 8 shuttle flights a day to heathrow,it's hub,offering around 1200 seats,more than emirates 2 flights a day to DXB.
it's a simple numbers game.other than new york,i cannot envisage a longhaul route from manchester that would be profitable for BA.

Ringwayman

1st Sep 2010, 23:15

They may well be transferring through DXB but I've not heard of many airlines adding capacity specifically detailing that there was a need for F class out of MAN when connecting to their own hubs in addtion to the "traditional" J and Y classes. My gut feeling is that it's going to be a bog standard 20% to 30% of EK passengers being point to point.

Projecting my 7 month total into a full year, we're talking roughly 550000 passengers on the route. So even just 10% travelling point to point still leads to 55,000 passengers that other airines would have the potential to attract away. (In crude terms, more than enough to fill 2 weekly 767s operated by BA in their "regional" configuration).

As for BA, they ceased to be of any relevance some years ago to the majority of the UK as they were unable to grasp any ideas of how to operate out of the regions profitably.

Ex Cargo Clown

1st Sep 2010, 23:54

bermudatriangle.

MAN made a very nice profit off the JFK and the ISB when it operated through there, I even believe the short-lived LAX was profitable, going back even further, the YYZ and HKG were as well.....

BA also caused mayhem with AA, QF and CX operating at non "pit" airports.

Sooner BA go to the wall the better, MAN are better without them.

pwalhx

2nd Sep 2010, 06:17

Bermuda Triangle, every time I have transitted Dubai (and that is quite a few times although not recently) I have walked a considerable amount further from the aircraft to the business lounge than from the end of Pier B to the luggage hall in Manchester. Equally in Manchester I haven't had the hazard of the amount of people arranged on the floor like an obstacle course.

UFGBOY

2nd Sep 2010, 07:29

They actually held 517 pax .....

Mr A Tis

2nd Sep 2010, 08:07

and I bet the Corsair 744s that pass thro' now and again on charters hold more than that !

Betablockeruk

2nd Sep 2010, 08:53

C24Y558 :ooh:

and pax usually in varied football modes.....:):{:yuk:

lplsprog

2nd Sep 2010, 09:13

2 x Corsiar 747s took 582 pax each from LPL to Athens for the European cup match.

TURIN

2nd Sep 2010, 09:21

ExCargoClown

Sooner BA go to the wall the better, MAN are better without them.

Thanks very much, I'll be standing outside your front door with my little girl and a begging bowl the next time she needs some new shoes, a hot meal and a roof over her head. :mad::ugh:

Jeesus, some people. How would you feel if I wished your employer go bust.

Mr.Bloggs

2nd Sep 2010, 10:07

Don't bother with exCargo Clown, not a pilot evidently. Nor a nice person. And a bit dumb

Skipness One Echo

2nd Sep 2010, 10:11

As for BA, they ceased to be of any relevance some years ago to the majority of the UK as they were unable to grasp any ideas of how to operate out of the regions profitably.

Ringwayman I enjoy your posts as you're a good read but I think that's a little off. BA still offer the regions access to their world hub in exactly the same way they have done for year. The only recent losses were BFS with JER, IOM(ex Manx) and INV (ex Dan Air and ex BA going back) moving to LGW. ABZ, EDI, GLA, NCL, MAN still enjoy good access to LHR and BA's services across the globe. Scotland and the North of England are still important to the bottom line. What you mean is that they refuse to split long haul within the UK and they closed the European hubs at BHX and MAN when the competion arrived with a fraction of the costs and the public voted with their feet. Fewer numbers, smaller aircraft, even fewer numbers, no case for capital investment etc etc. It wasn't worth the candle for two reasons.

1) People and businesses were voting with their feet when the locos arrived
2) BA were utterly useless at making money outside of LHR. Compare Speedbird Manchester, self handling, the highest paid cabin crew in the country and then pitch them up against a new generation of upstarts with a fraction of that. It took BA until now to face down BASSA.

MAN made a very nice profit off the JFK and the ISB when it operated through there, I even believe the short-lived LAX was profitable, going back even further, the YYZ and HKG were as well.....

Given that commercially sensitive information like this is not widely disseminated on a route by route basis is what you "know" is a "rumour" not a commercially verifiable fact? Working in business can blow your mind at the levels of complexity sometimes needed to make money. What can be on the face of it a money maker can be losing cash when you look deeper into it.

Given MAN-LAX was five a week and launched in the opposition of LHR who had other plans for a B767 it's a wonder it lasted as long.

The best example of BA's inability to get it right can be the LHR-BFS shuttle. Always busy, loads of connections but the internal accounting and allocation of revenue meant that it somehow managed to lose money. Same with the British Regional J41 fleet, Friday afternoon independent operator making money, Monday morning BA subsidiary losing money.

The ongoing hate affair between some Manchester posters and BA is like a soap opera. Many of the people who screwed MAN over in the BA / BOAC days are gone, some are even dead now ! BA couldn't make MAN work even with slashing the pay of regional staff they were still oddly uncompetitive. The future of MAN long haul is Emirates with staff on market rates and new shiny big aircraft. Let BA be the Heathrow hub + spoke that it needs to be to survive and *move on*. As a BA supporter, they're London Airways now, that's what they chose to be to survive. With ATI and the AA / BA / IB tie up they might have a long term future up against the might of the STAR ALLIANCE. What Manchester needs is exactly what touched down on 1-Sep to much acclaim. I don't demonise BA and take it personally, in the 21st century nor should you. I could have a poke at Emirates starting with a blank sheet and a low cost base and treating *some* of it's staff in a way that 95% of us cossetted Europeans would find reprehensible but I don't hero worship capitalist businesses. Now that would be odd!

Having said that I will be waving a camera towards Stand 12 at the weekend:) and just to mess with your heads, unlike last week and BA I'll be venturing North on Derby Airways I believe.....

Shed-on-a-Pole

2nd Sep 2010, 13:06

Hi Skipness,

I broadly concur with your comments that we in Manchester should accept BA's commercial decision to concentrate on the South-East and move on. However, I say this subject to two very important provisos.

1) In the case of those services on which BA does take bookings to/from MAN (ie. the Shuttles to LHR & LGW), the airline must respect the travel plans of the customers whose money it accepts. It is not acceptable for BA to cancel all Shuttles at the drop of a hat whenever there is the slightest whiff of problems in London. We may not live as far away from London as some other customers, but if we have entrusted BA to get us to our vital business meeting or cruise ship vacation, our need to travel is as important as that of anybody else. If the cruise ship is missed or the meeting is over by the time BA get you there they must accept that they will not find favour with the customers who are let down. Shuttle cancellations remain a major issue at MAN, especially in the Winter months. During bad weather, some LHR flights have to be cancelled. But the pain should be shared around. Scrubbing the MAN shuttles en bloc to run everything else is unacceptable.

2) Having elected to concentrate on London alone for its own business strategy (and fair enough), BA should not then be permitted to wield its considerable lobbying influence to inhibit competing carriers which are prepared to offer attractive services from the regions.

If BA respect these two important considerations, I would see no reason to argue with the company's decision to otherwise run its business however it chooses. As a frequent traveller, LHR transfers do not appeal to me personally, but I have no problem with BA concentrating on those offerings if they so choose.

Regards. SHED.

hammerb32

2nd Sep 2010, 13:45

Shed - I think you're point 1 is so pertinant, when ever there's an issue that results in cancelled flight the domestic transfers are the first to go, BA have to address this going forward. In terms of point 2 I would dis-agree, I just don't buy the conspiracy theory that BA blocks or inhibits other carriers from operating from MAN or any other airport. Problem now is that leaner and fitter carriers such as Emirates, Qatar and Etihad are dominating the market, I really can't see in current conditions a Cathay or Qantas going up agains them from anywhere in the UK other than LHR.

Betablockeruk

2nd Sep 2010, 15:48

All good points and not much to argue against. It's just the absolute abandonment of anything regional by the supposed flag carrier. Now, to demonstrate 'regional' long haul expansion.... I present to you Lufthansa!

Lufthansa S11 season

Service Increase to Daily
Munich – Mumbai 4 weekly 333 + 3 weekly 343 (5 weekly in S10)
Munich – Seoul Incheon – Busan Daily 343 (6 weekly in S10)
Munich – Singapore Daily 343 (5 weekly)
Other Service Increase
Munich – Miami Increase from 3 weekly (in S10) to 5 weekly (3 333 + 2 343)
Aircraft Change
Munich – Delhi A340-600 (343 in S10, maintained from W10)

Makes you weep!

Skipness One Echo

2nd Sep 2010, 16:18

Makes you weep!
It's just the absolute abandonment of anything regional by the supposed flag carrier.

You mean long haul don't you. It always comes back to the heavies. No one is shouting for the return of Brymon or British Regional I notice.

Imagine BA introduced tomorrow :

MAN-SIN on which SQ are retrenching and flying as a SIN-MUC tag on.
MAN-BOM into low yield India which even struggles at LHR.
MAN-DEL see above.
MAN-ICN
MAN-MIA

The last one *might* work if code shared with AA but is probably better suited to AA who have tried and failed here before. I get your point, really I do but put your hand on your heart and tell me how many of the above would be in profit in three years.

The whole UK economy is horribly skewed towards the home counties and the city within the M25. It's far from ideal but the UK isn't Germany and the analogy whilst initally appealing fails on further investigation alas. I see no way for BA to make these routes pay. Given the continued success of the unstoppable Emirates machine, you may see less long haul growth simply because the numbers stack up better going via DXB in the A380.

Hamburg 2K8

2nd Sep 2010, 17:20

I've seen pictures of the gate 12 area inside Pier B and it looks much more modern and bright, better seating, new LCD flight information screen and no carpet, proper flooring! Has the whole of Pier B been refurbished like this? Any pics of the area that the airbridges are connected to? Is this the boarding lounge?

Rob Courtney

2nd Sep 2010, 19:07

No I guess its just gate 12 at the moment although the whole pier resembled a building site when I went through last month. I guess you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette so I await my next trip with baited breath!!

Ringwayman

2nd Sep 2010, 19:18

Skipness, what I wrote may read as harsh but once they had the spark of starting Go!, they should have headed off easyJet at the outset by basing it away from the London area and, regrettably, abandon the hub strategy they they appeared to be developing; they never did quite harness the European flights into feeding the long-haul.

In terms of letting the Gulf carriers dominate the regions, sadly I have to wonder why the three alliances are letting them do this; SQ I keep hearing that half the F class is being booked out of MAN and J class is difficult to book. That cargo plays a part in keeping MAN viable should make me wonder if they will take the decision to delink the service again and trust the alleged pattern of F and J class bookings will continue. Although there is some murmuring about the current route being upgraded to A380 in the medium term.

Anywhere, it's reported elsewhere that they were 503 pax inbound today and 501 pax outbound on today's service.

Going loco

2nd Sep 2010, 20:56

In terms of letting the Gulf carriers dominate the regions, sadly I have to wonder why the three alliances are letting them do this

Not sure which data you are using, but traffic between UK regional airports and the Gulf was 1.7m in 2009. Traffic between UK regional airports and Heathrow was 5.5m. AF/KLM traffic is getting on for 4m between UK regional airports and their hubs in CDG & AMS. For proper UK regional coverage, KL are streets ahead.

wanna_be_there

2nd Sep 2010, 21:23

All this talk of BA and the regions, just want to put my 2 cents in:

I can understand why BA focus on heathrow as a hub. Its the capital, their base and where a good pax base comes in.
Just like EK serve MAN from their hub, AA from theirs, QR from theirs and so on, BA are serving routes ex-LHR from their hub.
Thats fine and dandy, but my main bone of contention is that they are now looking to expand elsewhere, and this place is MAD.
Again, I understand the IB tie in, but rather than give MAN a chance, expansion is going mile and miles south of the UK. Its BRITISH airways, not LHR-MAD airways!
Now, Id rather see BA set up a small hub at MAN, displacing some high frequency routes to MAN, for example LHR-NYC where AA has 5 or 6, and LHR has 9 (EWR/JFK).
Im sure LON pax would rather travel 100 miles up to MAN, or as seen as many pax originate north of the midlands anyway so not far for them to travel anyway, rather than send them hundred of miles south before bringing them northwards back to NYC, adding hours to their journey.
British Airways is a UK airline, so why not give the UK a chance? Im not expecting a full blown super hub with hundreds of flights to every world airport, but a MUC-esque hub similar to what LH have.

Now, this middle eastern dominance issue.

Yes, there are lots of pax travelling that way, and it is taking an ever increasing market share, but this is because it is the current best route. There is no viable/worthwhile competition at the moment, why would you travel MAN-LHR-SIN-SYD when you can travel MAN-MID EAST-SYD?
If the service was there, im sure pax would use it as the pax figures are obviously there.
I cant remember where the figures are, but I saw that 138000 pax travelled MAN-LHR-HKG, and thats just LHR, how many more via DXB/AUH/DOH/FRA/AMS and so on?
If you cant make at least 4 weekly flights work with that sort of figure, then you really are in trouble!
Now for yields. 138000 obviously like the price of the tickets MAN-LHR-HKG, and the CEO'S obviously like the price of the tickets MAN-LHR-HKG so why not start MAN with the same prices, meaning yields are there but costs are lower due to lower airport fees and dropping of the need of a MAN-LHR flights.

Just an idea but like I say, its just my 2 cents

PQC

2nd Sep 2010, 22:23

Goodness gracious! What a debate I've started.....

Ok. As far as BA bashing. Guilty as charged.

Understand the economics, but the point I'm trying to make is that through their actions over the last 5 years or so, BA have really alienated many people in the N of England who would have normally had some allegiance to flying with the supposed UK 'flag carrier'. Carriers like EK have exploited this and good luck to them. For me, BA is the last resort (i.e. LGW).

As Skipness says, if we could rely on BA making the links to their hub from their domestic links a priority, then they might be a viable proposition. But any sign of trouble and they sack them.

So, in summary, I agree with most of the sentiments of the posters. As history has proven over the last 50 years, MA can't rely on BA but can rely on other carriers to fill the gap that they haven't the acumen / ability to fulfil....

Curious Pax

3rd Sep 2010, 08:34

Whilst I agree with the thrust of your argument S1E, on a point of order it is worth mentioning that the most recent development in the retrenchment of SQ at MAN was actually to upgrade the service to daily as of this week!

Wanna_be_there: argument from the last century unfortunately. In the 21st century the country of origin of an airline is increasingly immaterial - ie RYR, EZY, AF, LH etc either with multiple non-domestic bases, or foreign subsidiaries, and that will only increase.

As the BA JFK flight demonstrated, a long haul base with a single daily flight will only ever have a shaky future at best, unless it can be ramped up to start to achieve a critical mass of daily flights. A long term plan, the resources to cope with 2-3 years of losses as traffic built up, and properly based crews would be an absolute minimum starting point, and I can't see BA being in a position to do that anytime soon even if they had the inclination.

The best chance of BA returning might be if they decided to partner with a new start up airline, which would have none of the overheads that BA have. Something along the lines of the model they used to have with GB Airways might work, as long as the start up had very deep pockets for the start up costs (we're probably talking 9 figure sums), but I won't be holding my breath!

Skipness One Echo

3rd Sep 2010, 09:01

Again, I understand the IB tie in, but rather than give MAN a chance, expansion is going mile and miles south of the UK. Its BRITISH airways, not LHR-MAD airways!
Now, Id rather see BA set up a small hub at MAN, displacing some high frequency routes to MAN, for example LHR-NYC where AA has 5 or 6, and LHR has 9 (EWR/JFK).

There's sadly no room for sentiment as one bad summer can kill an airline and the dole queue is a rather long one. A large amount of BA's profits come from a small number of select routes, the LHR-JFK being one of them, so sharing the resources with MAN doesn't work in the same way. 10 LHR-JFK flights will make more money than an 8+2 split, indeed they are heading to a half hourly evening shuttle out of JFK shared with AA. I think it's all about the connections, and with room to grow at MAD, they can have a business model with critical mass and some logic to it. i.e. US from London, South America from Madrid, bith hubs with large feeds, lounges, engineering staff and the whole shebang.

Great to hear SQ isn't giving up!

Betablockeruk

3rd Sep 2010, 09:01

Imagine BA introduced tomorrow

I wasn't exactly suggesting that. I'm well aware that transport networks take years to develop. Long term sustained growth is the only way forward and the BA horse has already bolted.

It would take a massive investment for BA to setup a regional long haul base and sadly they've got their hands full elsewhere.

globetrotter79

3rd Sep 2010, 11:02

Just playing devil's advocate...

It would take a massive investment for BA to setup a regional long haul base and sadly they've got their hands full elsewhere

Is this not exactly what they did not so long ago with OpenSkies in Paris?!

hammerb32

3rd Sep 2010, 11:26

Difference with Open skies is that it's aimed purely at the premium market of which there is rich pickings from Paris, no UK regional airport could sustain this sort of service to the US.

wanna_be_there

3rd Sep 2010, 11:27

There's sadly no room for sentiment as one bad summer can kill an airline

Its not so much about sentiment, but more of adjusting the resources accordingly.
The point I am trying to make is the following:

LHR is comming up to critical mass and BA in particular are looking at spreading their pax between LHR and MAD, but there are so many pax that are comming from the northern end of the UK that, quite frankly dont need to go through LHR if BA opened up a small selection of routes from the likes of MAN. For example, 138000 people flew MAN-LHR-HKG on BA/CX last year with their code sharing. as a full 365 day even split, thats 378 pax per day that are travelling through LHR.
If 1 HKG flight was moved up to LHR, that frees up those pax to go MAN-HKG direct, the old LHR-HKG slots could be used to open up a new needed route from LHR so not only are pax staying with BA/CX, but they will be happier thanks to a direct service and BA gets its much needed expansions and BAA doesnt loose out at the pax/slot void would soon be filled with another route. Win win win for all sides!
Yield wise, say a ticket MAN-LHR-HKG was £500, pax are obviously happy paying this and BA/CX are obviously happy with the returns of this. They could still charge £500 for said ticket MAN-HKG, but lower landing fees and the removal of the need of the MAN-LHR segment means profit per ticket actually increases!

JFK was another example as how many pax are travelling MAN-LHR-NYC that could easily be contained at MAN rather than clog up all the LHR services? AA has shown BA that demand is there (yet BA still refuse to code share on this?)

There would need to be a few routes that could be moved to MAN to make a small hub viable cost wise, otherwise we would just have another issue the same as the BA MAN-JFK route which lost money not because of pax yield/loads, but the sheer cost of operating a stand alone route.

Another benefit of this could be that as more pax can be contained at MAN, this could also free up one or 2 slots from the shuttles, as less pax means less need for them.

So basically, think of it as a river, running from a mountain top to the sea, via a resevoir half way down. At the moment, the resevoir water level is getting higher and higher to the point the dam is going to breach, and quite frankly, the water doesnt need to be there. Its time to dig a secondary channel so that the water can by-pass the resevoir and get to the sea quicker, easier and relieving the stresses on the resevoir. That is the MAN-LHR-XXX situation.

EC-ILS

3rd Sep 2010, 11:37

Interesting stats wanna-be-there can I ask for your source?

wanna_be_there

3rd Sep 2010, 11:48

No problem EC-ILS.

Firstly, apologies as its actually stats for 2008 not 2009, should have read the title a bit better. Its the CAA report on UK connections.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/5/Connecting_Passengers_at_UK_Airports.pdf

Page 12 of the report

Skipness One Echo

3rd Sep 2010, 11:56

The staff are in one place. The engineering cover is in one place. The aircraft are based in one place. The passengers are fed into one place. This is the hub and spoke concept, the one that Emirates uses really well too remember.

If 1 HKG flight was moved up to LHR, that frees up those pax to go MAN-HKG direct, the old LHR-HKG slots could be used to open up a new needed route from LHR so not only are pax staying with BA/CX, but they will be happier thanks to a direct service and BA gets its much needed expansions and BAA doesnt loose out at the pax/slot void would soon be filled with another route. Win win win for all sides!
Yield wise, say a ticket MAN-LHR-HKG was £500, pax are obviously happy paying this and BA/CX are obviously happy with the returns of this. They could still charge £500 for said ticket MAN-HKG, but lower landing fees and the removal of the need of the MAN-LHR segment means profit per ticket actually increases!

What you say makes good sense but I have to say that it really, really doesn't work like this in reality. One hub at either end, not a split hub between the UK capital and another airport.

Do you really think BA has Cathay's arm up it's back preventing them flying HKG-MAN? In the real world, a direct MAN-HKG would cost more for a ticket more than MAN-LHR-HKG. Why pay more to fly direct when Emirates has a good one stop service for less? Remember that one less flight from LHR, in some eyes, makes LHR less competitive. If Cathay moved a flight to MAN from LHR, what can happen is that the competition juggle slots and fly the same route at your old time and nick your premium passengers.

This was the reason the "BA Hub Without the Hubbub" concept crashed at LGW. Every flight they moved to LGW left the front end at LHR with the competition. Yes I agree that's a little mad but there we go!

I doubt anyone would drop a LHR slot in favour of MAN, the question remains why CX have failed to add a complimentary service on the A340 say. For that, I suspect the reason is the Emirates A380 and the rise of Qatar and Etihad at MAN.

All names taken

3rd Sep 2010, 12:22

Interesting debate re long haul but I suspect not all contributors have much experience of the matter even as a mere passenger like me.

The BA bashing is tiresome really - it's a private business, not the Ministry of Aviation and they have a right to operate where they feel they can make (most) money - like any other airline. I tend not to use BA myself as I don't like the drag of LHR - and yes even T5 - but to say that Northern folk 'are increasingly refusing to use them' smacks only of sour grapes. I wonder whether the so-called goodwill that people talk about on here is only amongst the aviation enthusiast community, as most people I know don't give a hoot. A friend of mine, living only 20 minutes from Manchester Airport, who regularly travels business class to the US - including to a place that has a daily non stop from MAN still insists on flying to LHR and back across with BA because he collects BA miles, He gets enough over the course of a year to pay for a nice family holiday. That sort of thing goes on quite a lot whether we like it or not.

In terms of further long haul expansion to the east from MAN, good news as Emirates is, it was one more nail in the coffin in terms of other airlines trying new routes. One possible exception is HKG because the numbers might make a non stop work, but that would be it.

A couple more points based on the real world of people who actually do the flying that creates the demand for these routes and airlines:

1. To make any long haul route work for business pax really, you need a daily service, There would be no way I would stay an extra day in some far flung destination to wait for a direct service to MAN when I could get back to the family through a usually wide range of options, a whole day sooner. Something like a 2x weekly to (say) Beijing would likely end up with a full back end of aircraft with people who don't mind when they travel as long as it's cheap.....and a near empty front end as the business passengers will have made other arrangements. Result: failed service.

2. Those that talk about Emirates and their great connections to China, obviously haven't had to do that on business unless they like sitting in aeroplanes. If you're in MAN and need to go to Beijing you would probably go with Lufthansa or Finnair, I've tried most of the viable options and those are the best,
Reality check over.

wanna_be_there

3rd Sep 2010, 12:30

Do you really think BA has Cathay's arm up it's back preventing them flying HKG-MAN?
the question remains why CX have failed to add a complimentary service on the A340 say

A service on said A340 was very nearly launched, to the point the route was put on sale!
I dont know the truth behind it but most seemed to say it was bmi who threw their toys out of the pram that time preventing the service starting.

EK fly to their hub, QR to theirs, EY to theirs and all the time, oneworld are loosing pax over this. It is a good question now as to why a counter attack has not begun by CX from their hub.
The amount of cargo CX shift Via MAN, surely that alone could absorb a lot of the costs of a MAN-HKG route?

Mr A Tis

3rd Sep 2010, 14:05

I used the old Cathay services via ZRH/AMS/CDG and they were pretty well used, considering there were capacity restraints due to the one stop pick up.
Ive tried the CX from HKG via LHR and it was a nightmare of a journey, the CX flight to LHR had very few pax on it,(maybe indicating HKG-LHR is over saturated ?), but the connection hasssle was awful as was the shuttle experience.
If CX come back to MAN then I would use them. In the meantime, I'm more than happy to use Swiss or Lufthansa on their one stop flights.
As has already been said, CX shift enough cargo from MAN, so they already have the mx infrastructure / handling / crew changes etc in place. I would have thought a 744 or 777 five times a week would carry enough cargo to make the pax service very viable - if they realy wanted to come back.

The more recent aborted re-start was for a CX service via Moscow with full pax rights. Not a bad idea in itself as we have no direct Moscow flights either. The rumour was that BMI hold traffic rights on MAN-Moscow & objected to this proposed service-whether that is true or not, I do not know.
If it's true, I don't understand how an airline can object to a route they don't operate, but I guess political bi lateral agreements come into play here. At the end of the day, CX could have opted for plan B, but maybe they just didn't have one.

runway24

3rd Sep 2010, 14:24

I note that 2 days on from the 1st A380 EK service, MAG have still not issued any form of press release to coincide with this big event. In fact, the last release was 18 Aug saying they were A380 ready.

They are missing a trick if they cannot make the most of this PR dream opportunity.....

wanna_be_there

3rd Sep 2010, 15:00

Do they need to make a press release? It was well covered by most UK news groups and watched by thousands of people. All worked effortlessly in front of the media/spectators so what else would MAN need to say?

Skipness One Echo

3rd Sep 2010, 15:04

I agree with much of this, just wonder why they didn't go for the MAN-HKG direct on the A340 without the Moscow stop. I think the cargo on the A340-300 would be restricted perhaps so not ideal? Predating the arrival of the B77W as well......now there's a thought! I couldn't see QANTAS back but Cathay seem a better candidate.

The onworld hub in question is LHR but they are a decade away from bring T3 up to T5 standards to have good connections with UK domestics from T3. Ah Britain....we're quite rubbish at this sort of thing you know!

wanna_be_there

3rd Sep 2010, 15:10

I agree with Skipiness, the B77W for Cathay would be ideal for MAN.
Size wise, yes its going to take a lot for pax to fill it up, but the cargo underneath will help absorb any slack for the most part.
Maybe bringing the 2 class B77W is what CX are waiting for ex-MAN.

Also agree that aside from our annual charter on the QF2, we will never see QF back at MAN, their chance has long gone in my opinion.

mickyman

3rd Sep 2010, 15:11

runway24

Plenty of cover in the local and national media that
I have read and watched.

MM

roverman

3rd Sep 2010, 17:30

A momentous week in the history of MAN draws to a close, with much reason to be optimistic and to feel that the we are also nearing the end of what has been a difficult few years in the history of this special 'second city' airport.

We have to put BA behind us, their position is understandable, and the LHR/MAD hubbing makes sense for them. It is right that they should not be allowed to block those that do wish to generate new direct services from anywhere else in the UK, though.

MAN's long-haul future lies in being a spoke off as many distant hubs as it can, and there are a good few out there that surely hold potential, both in the east and in the Americas. The long-delayed arrival of the B787 will hopefully see the introduction of some far flung exotic charters too.

The future is bright, and not just Orange.

R.I.P. Gordon Sweetapple - Airport Director in the 1970s -1981. Died 26/08/2010.

Higher Archie

3rd Sep 2010, 19:02

A good week for Manchester with Emirates' start with the A380, after the media festival for the first day, everything has gone very smoothly. So very well done to the MA Ops team. The press coverage was great, with Emirates cleverly promoting the service and that many crew members were from the local area.

Almost un-noticed SQ restarted a daily Singapore service.

All in all pretty good for a 'regional' airport, or as Roverman put it, 'the Second City'. Which Manchester isn't. It's a confident and innovative city that really believes that the UK doesn't just revolve around London.

Gordon Sweetapple, who died recently, would have seen a very different airport, one that is globally connected, rather than just flying holiday-makers to Spain. But Gordon was an important part of the Airport's history. RIP.

One more thing ... apparently there's an anti-aviation protest arranged for tomorrow, a joint event with LCY groups protesting about domestic flights. There's no flights between MAN and LCY. About 30 protestors expected tomorrow for a tea-party. Apparently 7,000 turned up to see the A380 on Wednesday.

A good week.

spannersatcx

3rd Sep 2010, 19:04

What I know of CX pax flt ex MAN.

The plan was HKG-SVO-MAN vv, it was less than a month before the launch, and a lot of things were in place ready for it, then BMI objected, my understanding was/is BMI had the rites and for whatever reason (probably political) had not been aloud to fly it and therefore objected to someone else being allowed to fly said route, hence CX never got off the ground. :sad:

I understand that the MAN service has been looked at again and there is a possible return of a service, this if it happens will not be in the next couple of years. As I am led to believe, whoever makes these decisions, as the right equipment is not currently available at CX to fly this route at a profit. 2 class, right capacity etc etc.

I and everyone I talk to believes there is a market for a flt at MAN, it has to be timed correctly, the flts via AMS/ZRH/CDG/FRA were never a good time, MAN used to loose a lot of business class to LHR just so they could get an evening flt.

I'm staggered to read the figures for those that flew to HKG from MAN via LHR, if you can't make a profit out of that then I don't know what.:eek:

Cargo flts have been reduced fom 7 to 6 a week, although that will go back up to 7 in the winter, this is so a round the world freighter service can operate HKG-ANC-ORD-SPL-HKG. Although 2 or 3 years ago it was 13 a week with KA operating as well!

Most of these decisions are made in HKG, and once made you will find it very difficult to get these people to change, it's a cultural thing, something to do with lose of face.:ugh:

I would like to see a CX pax flt return to MAN, there has to be the market there for it, just can't see it happening anytime soon, maybe when the A350 arrives!:confused:

roverman

3rd Sep 2010, 21:16

I don't want to open that whole Manchester vs. Birmingham 'second city' thing. There's no clear definition and it's a pointless debate. My context was aviation, and in aviation terms MAN is the second city for the UK.

BTNH

3rd Sep 2010, 22:40

where wouldt the 380 divert to in the case it can not land at man??

GayFriendly

3rd Sep 2010, 22:45

BHX I have been told is the first div point for the A380 if it can't get into MAN

BTNH

3rd Sep 2010, 22:48

thanks for your quick answer!:ok:

Bagso

4th Sep 2010, 07:20

One benefit of being a “Grumpy Old Man” is being around long enough to know something of the history of MAN and its relationship with BA. I am loathe to bring this often repeated subject up yet again but the history may explain the resentment to them at Manchester, and also why MAN never reached full potential !

After WW2 the Air Ministry designated two airports in the UK as "gateway airports", Heathrow and Prestwick. Prestwick was chosen because it had the longest runway of any civil airport outside London and because there was still significant traffic between the US and UK, and little traffic to the rest of the world , at that time it “seemed” a natural location for an international gateway.

Fast forward to the 1970s and by now Manchester had established itself as a major airport, Pan Am TWA, Seaboard, Qantas amongst many many others all applied and failed to obtain rights to serve Manchester, quite simply the air agreements between countries didn't allow it. Heathrow became fully established as the UK's ONLY true major international gateway airport, its an undeniable fact that its success today is built on the monopoly it enjoyed at that time !

Heathrow's position was strengthened even more with the merger of BOAC and BEA in the 1970s, this was possibly the start of the "hub concept" certainly in the UK, with the introduction of "The Shuttle".

This provided fast hourly connections from Manchester Glasgow, Belfast , and Edinburgh with very few cancellations and a "guaranteed seat", there was even provision for a back up aircraft on standby if the 1st aircraft was full, I only mention this in the context of the frequent cancellations which occur today !

Now enter Gil Thompson (in the early eighties), something of a visionary regarding MAN and an ex-BA man who knew the politics relating to those long standing air agreements which had thus far prevented Manchester from becoming a major international gateway. Using the same calculations quoted in recent postings on this thread he demonstrated to airlines such as SIA and AA that a significant % of traffic was being moved via Heathrow on "the shuttle", to destinations that could be viable served with a direct service.

Incredibly the air agreements written 30 years prior were "still" in force and BA continued to use these very effectively to block any expansion at Manchester for many years, understandably they simply did not wish to dilute their Heathrow shuttle traffic. BA lobbied the Thatcher government of the day by suggesting that airlines were of course free to use PWK (which of course was no threat), but the rules did not permit flights to MAN. It was of course complete and utter nonsense but it worked. Airlines which were becoming constrained by frequency at Heathrow now looked at Manchester but were continually rebuffed.

Gil Thompson backed by a massive publicity campaign finally managed to convince the government that this was a crazy situation and eventually SIA and AA were allowed in, that was in 1986. That "should" have been the start of major expansion but the dreaded agreements continued to be used as obstacles to Manchester's growth !

Sadly the angst with BA continued to fester as airlines which had been sold the concept of viable 3/4 a week service using the same calculations quoted on this thread suddenly found themselves with competition. Inexplicably BA which had long argued and fought to prevent an expansion outside the South East announced there own commitment to Manchester..blah blah blah".

Sadly in most cases this commitment only went as far as starting on routes already established by "other" airlines where there was simply not the traffic to support two carriers. In addition other routes where BA did not compete but were seemingly successful, simply evaporated as BA entered into more and more code share or partnership agreements.

This hopefully will explain once and for all the long standing antagonism toward BA, I suspect it will never disappear, but as others have said time, it really is time to move on !

I must confess I was sceptical that we would ever see an A380 in Manchester, but there is talk this may even be increased to 3 or even more, bring it on ! Many airlines have tried and failed at MAN even though they "appear" to carry full loads, it is a conundrum.

Manchester is not "A Heathrow" but it is much much more than just a regional airport. Maybe fast and frequent service to Dubai is the answer and might just be Manchester's salvation for renewed growth ?

As the CEO is from the North West it may be that he more than most, fully understands Manchester's potential and what might turn out to be a sustainable formulae for success !

Ian Brooks

4th Sep 2010, 09:36

Bagso:D
Well said that man, history tells it all, when I think back to my first days in travel
Manchester didn`t even have 1 Lufthansa flight a day let alone what we have today
as for long haul it was JFK/YYZ via PWK with BOAC which seemed a very half hearted service even in those days

Ian B

Hamburg 2K8

4th Sep 2010, 21:35

So how many weekly flights do LH have out of MAN nowadays? I know they serve 5 destinations from MAN, very good compared to AF/KL & SK. I assume MAN is LH's biggest market in the UK after LHR? They must be pleased with MAN?

Also, anyone know of any trip reports from the first A380 EK flight? I've had a search for them and looked on the trip reports forum on airlines.net, but can't seem to find any, thought they would of been some posted by now?! Maybe it's just me being impatient, I'm sure getting a trip report togeather does take a bit of time.

CabinCrewe

4th Sep 2010, 21:47

The IATA code for Prestwick is PIK

Ringwayman

4th Sep 2010, 22:38

LH = 4 daily to FRA, 3 daily to MUC, 16 or 17 weekly to DUS (going to 21?), 17 or 18 weekly to HAM and 6 weekly to STR. Therefore, about 88 weekly flights.

>>>> have read a business article from the 8th March 2010 stating 87 weekly flights going to 92 with the Stuttgart services.

Will have to dig around for the number passengers they carry but I believe it's in excess of 500,000 a year.

>>>> And that article says 2009 saw them have 540,000 passengers which was down 5% but with passenger increases from October 2008. Throwaway comment: "Manchester is our second strongest airport out of London so it was the next logical step to increase the number of destinations. At the moment Stuttgart is only serviced out of London."

chiglet

4th Sep 2010, 22:51

This provided fast hourly connections from Manchester Glasgow, Belfast , and Edinburgh with very few cancellations and a "guaranteed seat", there was even provision for a back up aircraft on standby if the 1st aircraft was full

Not for the outlaws. Many years ago...
They returned from Oz,having an "engine problem" in "The Gulf".
BA at MAN hadn't got a clue about this prob [or so they said].
Working in ATC I got hold of BA at LHR and found the prob. When I told the peeps waiting for Oz pax [40+] the griff, the BA staff roundly berated me [even more so when I gave out (as volunteered by LHR BA staff) the LHR phone no.
The end of it was, they "missed" a Shuttle....none existant, and were put on the "first available" Shuttle, the last LHR-MAN of the day
We were fortunate, because I had "some" inside info.
Outlaws due to arrive....0930. ATA 2230 :mad:
AFAIK, Eastern Airways were the only Airline to offer a guaranteed backup a/c. If BA did, I cannot remember one at Manch

42psi

4th Sep 2010, 23:08

AFAIK, Eastern Airways were the only Airline to offer a guaranteed backup a/c. If BA did, I cannot remember one at Manch

I seem to recall that originally BA did say that the shuttles would have back-up a/c & crews at each end ...

but in practice ...

I think the "back up" applied only to the LHR end, unless anyone knows better ? :E

But I do recall from my days at LHR that even that didn't always apply.

Every Christmas the shuttles (and particularly the BFS) ran out of a/c and/or crew by early afternoon .. with long queues of pax building up .. and many, many pax gurmbling about "where were there back-up's promised".

IB4138

5th Sep 2010, 07:49

Can only recall a standby aircraft once being made available at MAN in my shuttle days. With the Trident full, a One-Eleven was put into service.

Shed-on-a-Pole

5th Sep 2010, 09:03

Courtesy of posters on the Eastern Airways thread:

From Monday (presumably September 6th), an Eastern Airways Saab 2000 will operate regular flights on MAN-ABZ on behalf of BMI Regional. This is to release an E145 which is required for commitments at LHR.

easyJet Jack

5th Sep 2010, 12:40

You've probably seen this but thought I would post anyway as a refresher!

Manchester Airport Terminal 1 | Aedas.com (http://www.aedas.com/Europe/ManchesterAirportTerminal1)

Looks like if we're all patient, we'll get the first class 5* pier everybody has been moaning about!

eJJ

Hamburg 2K8

5th Sep 2010, 18:54

Thanks for the refresher Easyjet Jack. I have been wondering about this redevelopment on Pier B for a while. Have MAN got the funds for this? If not, when will they have? I know Stand 12 and an extension for the EK A380 has been done only recently and looks very nice and modern compared to the rest of Pier B, but it urgently needs re-building. Is Pier B going to be refurbished inside for the rest of the gates?

Also, Pier C isn't the best looking from the outside at least, not to bad inside I suppose, but certainly not as bad as Pier B is, before Gate 12 of course.
Anyone with any info?
　
　
　
　

TURIN

5th Sep 2010, 21:40

AFAIK, Eastern Airways were the only Airline to offer a guaranteed backup a/c. If BA did, I cannot remember one at Manch

The LHR shuttle had a 1-11 on standby everyday. It was usually parked on the south bay so by the time it got towed onto stand or the crew/pax bussed over to it the pax would have probably been waiting a further hour and just assumed they were on the next scheduled flight.

Occasionally the forward bookings would 'predict' that the backup was required and all would be in place (crew,catering loaders etc) for a perfect service-but not often.

Excelsbest

6th Sep 2010, 12:14

Just seen the 1st Go-Around of the Emirates A380 at MAN. Pretty impressive right turn amazing to see so soon into service fro
MAN

spannersatcx

6th Sep 2010, 15:27

and now the great white elephant is tech, oh dear.:E

msea

6th Sep 2010, 15:30

Sunday landed on 5r

Betablockeruk

6th Sep 2010, 15:38

and now the great white elephant is tech, oh dear

Yeah, CX002 went all the way to BRU no higher than FL230......

Is that what you meant? ;)

A330ETOPS

6th Sep 2010, 17:33

Rumour has it A380 total tech. Apparantly 'bent' landing gear. Sounds a bit extreme so Don't shout at me if i've got it wrong!

spannersatcx

6th Sep 2010, 17:36

WRONG... sorry, info I have is it is a well known electrical fault that the 180 suffers from!:eek:

ManofMan

6th Sep 2010, 18:08

Whoops...looks like she is staying the night as crew ran out of hours.....ring ring...hello is that the Hilton...can i please book 500+ rooms for the night !!!

twinjetter

6th Sep 2010, 18:25

ManofMan

EGCC Hilton has the "no room at the Inn" sign up (I got two of the last ones this morning, and write from there now:O)

Just waiting for an EK First Class pap to offer me something silly for my hutch - I am always open to offers!

Nice g/a on approach #1 from the EK; but the Monarch 'Bus trumped it with it's dirty low pass at not-many-ft agl.

Happy Days, and a comfy(ish) double for one.

TWJ

clareview

6th Sep 2010, 19:12

The BFS - LHR Shuttle (subsequently Super Shuttle) normally operated with a B757 with another 757 or a 737/200 as a back up. The concept was turn up and fly even if you do not have a ticket. The BFS route was not hourly but more or less every other hour. The TV ad that is most memoriable is a video of a B757 with the voice over this plan contains 2 pilots, x cabin crew and one very important passenger. On several occasions I was one of fewer than 10 on the back up. But of course in those days fares were many times what they are today.

Peover Prop

6th Sep 2010, 19:33

Man of Man

If 380 remains over-night did we expect to see two 380s together at MAN so soon?

What is the likelihood

Peover Prop

Curious Pax

6th Sep 2010, 20:21

Looking at Emirates website it would appear that today's EK18 will now depart as EK8018 at 1400 tomorrow. Presumably both 380s won't go from gate 12 (regular flight is scheduled out at 1410). Could be interesting!

Hamburg 2K8

6th Sep 2010, 20:37

So is the EK018 still on Stand 12? If so, was tonight's 777 on stand 31? And where will tomorrow's EK018 go tomorrow if today's flight is on stand 12?

Ringwayman

6th Sep 2010, 20:39

The only other A380 compliant stand is gate 62. Or rather it was, last time I looked at some plans.

conti onepass

6th Sep 2010, 20:42

im sure they will have something sorted .... HOPEFULLY

ManofMan

6th Sep 2010, 21:06

Tonights flight went on Pier C, think its 31....EDL will be repositioned to 62 (the other compliant stand) before EDH arrives...with all this talk of EDL going at 1400 i take it they have fixed the problem ???

TURIN

6th Sep 2010, 21:08

Spanners is right. Electrical fault.

Where's a B2 when you need one. :sad:

learjet50

6th Sep 2010, 22:24

I suspect they know what the problem is and what part they need.

I suspect the afor mentioned part will arrive on the Flight tommorow Lunchtime flight be fitted and Bob s your uncle EDL will Depart so I guest there will be 2 A380 departures between 14-1500

Just my suspicions ///
However I would have thought they must have the required part at Toulouse which could have been sent to Man However I dont know how all the swopping and transfer of bits works

Have a Nice Day

I am sure the EK Staff at Man will be greatful when tommorows over

Gezza

AUTOGLIDE

7th Sep 2010, 05:42

Hamburg,

I arrived at T1 yesterday evening (Pier C) and the experience was frankly appalling. The immigration queue was all the way down the pier, then the baggage piled up on the baggage belt because most pax were still in the immigration queue. Result being bags jamming up, getting damaged, and falling off the belt. The pax that did make to the baggage belt couldn't get their bags anyway because the amount already doing their 100th rotation were preventing any new ones coming through from the baggage hall. In all, even with using IRIS it took well over an hour to get to get out of the dump. Whenever I arrive at T1, from anywhere, it's like going back in time to a really bad version of the seventies.

Mr A Tis

7th Sep 2010, 15:50

Not bad, less than a week into the new service and we've had the first go around and a double daily departure !:)
I see todays flight left about 30 minutes late, with yesterdays flight leaving less than an hour behind.
Anyone know how the double flight handling went? I presume one service operated from remote Gate 62? Guess the bizz lounge were pretty busy today:ok:

Re the T1 arrival queues, yes just recently it's got really bad at certain times of the day, but it's out of MA control as to what the Border Control people do. I've stood in many a queue at Atlanta, JFK, CDG & Vancouver immigration for over an hour many a time, and then still had to wait for bags. At least at MAN, when you get thro' border control the bags are usually there for you.

BillS

7th Sep 2010, 16:08

At least at MAN, when you get thro' border control the bags are usually there for you.
Been a number of reports on VS forums that baggage is taking 1 - 2 Hours to arrive after pax.
But thats T2.

Scottie Dog

7th Sep 2010, 18:01

I notice that the Notams relating to the ILS being Cat I only have been removed - does this mean that CAT III has finally been approved?

roverman

7th Sep 2010, 18:14

The 05L/23R ILS is now CAT III having successfully completed the 300-hour burn-in at both ends.

Scottie Dog

7th Sep 2010, 18:42

That was a quick response 'kind sir'.

Thank you very much.

Hamburg 2K8

7th Sep 2010, 19:09

How many desks are they at Immigration in T1, 2 & 3? Is there no way of expanding the hall in T1? Also, the baggage reclaim area in T1 is not huge, no room for extension to this either?

I know I have asked this before, but any pics of inside the extension at the end of Pier B anywhere? Also, I still can't find any trip reports on the first EK A380 service, a week tomorrow and even the trip reports forum on airliners.net has nothing, sorry if i'm impatient (please don't shout, I blame my job), but thought someone would of done one and if so, would of uploaded it by now?

coneshell

7th Sep 2010, 19:21

Not quite a flight review H2K8, but someone wasn`t impressed.

Emirates Airline Customer Reviews | SKYTRAX (http://www.airlinequality.com/Forum/emrts.htm)

donnlass

7th Sep 2010, 19:22

Just out of interest is the Emirates 777 still doing the 21:00 run?

Flightcheck says it does but there is nothing about it on TAS Whats Due and no sign of it on Caspar.

Thanks in advance.

conti onepass

7th Sep 2010, 19:41

emirates is still doing late flight, why wouldnt they?

donnlass

7th Sep 2010, 20:11

Thats brilliant but couldnt track it on Caspar and couldnt find any record of it on TAS but might get out to the airport some evening and watch it before the A380 boots it off that schedule as well.:p

My fave aircraft, well after the A340!!!:O

I know Etihad and Singapore are flying them but its not the same. Emirates lights up the whole airport with that livery and will miss 777 when it goes:{:{.

strid

7th Sep 2010, 20:20

Excuse me for what may be deemed a silly question.....does the A380 'daily' service extend to the weekend - if yes what time?
Thanks

purplehelmet

7th Sep 2010, 20:29

donnlass.
dont forget casper has a 15min delay,so at 20.22 you were trying to track it far to early for a 21.00 landing:8
also dont worry the 380 wont replace the 777 on this flight for quite some time if at all:ok:

purplehelmet

7th Sep 2010, 20:36

strid.
yes its every day arrives 12.25 departs 14.10:ok:

Hamburg 2K8

7th Sep 2010, 20:46

A friend of mine flew from Crete tonight in Greece, can't remembe the name of the airport but she flew on Monarch, any idea what she came back on? Said she flew out on an A330, thought the A321 or B757 would be allocated to this route, don't the A330's concentrate more on Carribean, Goa, places like that?

Mr @ Spotty M

7th Sep 2010, 20:53

It would have been a A300 if it was MON3589 from CHQ or MON3975 from HER.:ok:

TSR2

7th Sep 2010, 20:55

Was probably MON3975 arrived 20.05 and was operated by A300.

donnlass

7th Sep 2010, 20:56

Hi Strid, it will still come in at 12:25 and depart again at 14:10 every day and weekends.

Electrical problems permitting:}:}

donnlass

7th Sep 2010, 20:58

Thanks Purplehelmet, will try again tomorrow. :O:cool:

Hamburg 2K8

7th Sep 2010, 21:07

Thanks for the replies, think it was the flight that landed at 20.05. She's not the best at knowing her planes, but would she of gone out on an A300 too? Or was it the A330 like she said? I always seem to see A320, A321 & A300 at MAN but never B757 or A330, when well I'm there anyway.

Mr @ Spotty M

8th Sep 2010, 04:48

Would have been both ways, A330 operates the CUN flight on a Tuesday.:ok:

mytravela330

8th Sep 2010, 15:54

does anyone know of any new routes or airlines that are going to be starting soon?? iv heard that United Airlines might be starting a florida service next year.... that along with the Virgin Las Vegas for next summer...:ok:

Johnny F@rt Pants

8th Sep 2010, 18:06

Jet2 to Brive for summer 2011

Ringwayman

8th Sep 2010, 18:35

United, if they add anything, will not be looking at Florida as that is not where they're focused at. PErhaps Chicago may come onstream but whether that will be at the expense of one of the Newark service or in addition to them would need to be determined.

AircraftOperations

8th Sep 2010, 18:44

OltonPete

8th Sep 2010, 18:47

United to Florida certainly got a smile from me.

The ORD rumour seems reasonable and is based on three Continental
ETOPS 75W's moving to Chicago to operate Oslo, Manchester & BHX
(Not United aircraft).

Whether CO have three ETOPS 75W's spare is a matter for debate
but some on that other forum believe they do still have some on
domestic flying.

Also rumoured in time is Washington on a United 757 and a US Air
Charlotte by 762 (I know a 757 is rumoured per the Dublin thread).

Then of course Delta Detroit - MAN is now also rumoured.

Some of these have started from the US side of the Atlantic,
not just UK wet dreams.

What a difference a year makes.

Pete

eggc

8th Sep 2010, 19:31

I've got another for your list Pete, as DFW also has MAN on its new route wish list....one for American again ?

IF (big IF) all these routes come to be then T2 will be a busy place in the morning with 3 x DL, 3 or 4 x CO/UA & 2 US...bloody good job the 3 AA's would be over at T3 !

STATSMAN

9th Sep 2010, 07:02

Ok for the summer, but this winter in the afternoon the tumbleweed will be rolling past Cafe Nero.

SM

OltonPete

9th Sep 2010, 18:50

It seems changes ahead this winter with Manchester losing two Air France/Regional flights in the week but gaining a flybe.

Also the first Air France inbound is a A321 per the Air France site.

The other two flights are 320's so no 190 or 318.

Flybe operate 06.15 departure as a 195 followed by a Q400 at 06.45.
Then 12.45 (Q400) and 17.35 (195).

No more Air France night-stops.

A very rough estimate like BHX it seems a net loss of a few seats
(under 100 a day).

Pete

The96er

9th Sep 2010, 18:57

AF operate out of T2 at MAN where as Flybe operate from T3 !! - will the Flybe operated flights originate in T2 or T3 ??

Ian Brooks

9th Sep 2010, 19:02

Looking at the Air France website not showing any dep ex CDG after 15.55 for this winter, something not right there

Ian

JC25

9th Sep 2010, 20:34

The schedules appear to be confusing at the moment, but I received this from BE today:

Today we have put an early selection of seats on sale offering increased choice, capacity, enhanced services and added frequency on key routes to France.

It’s all about lots of new seats now on sale for travel effective October 31st in an exciting package that includes more choice, more flights, more routes, added frequency and enhanced services to France for Flybe passengers!

In what is the first of a two-phase release resulting from our recently announced codeshare arrangement with Air France, we have announced four significant pieces of news that greatly enhance our services into Paris:

An increased choice of up to 14 daily flights to and from Manchester and Paris (CDG)
An increased choice of up to 12 flights a day to and from Birmingham and Paris (CDG)
A new service operating between Edinburgh and Paris (CDG) offering up to six flights a day
Increased frequency on our new route to and from Southampton airport and Paris Orly airport with up to six convenient flights a day

In what will prove yet another real benefit to Flybe passengers, effective October 31st, all of our services to and from Paris Charles de Gaulle airport will conveniently connect to the Air France hub at Terminal 2E. This will greatly expand Flybe’s global reach and allow seamless and easy access to all of Air France’s extensive international services.

Ian Brooks

9th Sep 2010, 22:46

That sounds better, just didn`t make sense at first

Ian B

parky747

10th Sep 2010, 05:16

Sadly 29/9/10 marks the end of AA's seasonal JFK appearance on MAN departure boards.

Much speculation suggested this route were to become a year round service, though evidently no commitment from AA as yet, again leaving oneworld with no MAN direct link to JFK!

AUTOGLIDE

10th Sep 2010, 05:54

On a flight into MAN last week, I did (nicely) ask the Border staff as to the reason behind the long queues. I was told (very nicely) that there are a large number of non-EU students arriving into MAN at the moment on certain flights. Their paperwork needs careful checking, which often takes up time and manpower - this can knock onto any EU passengers who happen to arrive around the same time.
Suppose it makes sense.
8th September 2010 19:35

It would do if it wasn't for the fact that the huge queues are always in the EU line, and the foreign passports line is almost always empty. The EU line had all booths staffed so it wasn't as if resources were being deployed to the non-EU line. The problem, and it seems to affect most UK airports, is that there is simply a lack of immigration counters and staff. Arrive through a German airport and you'll find passport control desks all over the place, and it takes less than 2 mins on average to get through in my experience. Compare and contrast with MAN, it has, what, 4 desks for all of T1 and about 6 for T2. Pathetic and backward. The country is an embarassment to arrive back at.

Ringwayman

10th Sep 2010, 07:04

AA to JFK is probably going to be year-round from next year.

Curious Pax

10th Sep 2010, 07:40

Arrive through a German airport and you'll find passport control desks all over the place, and it takes less than 2 mins on average to get through in my experience. Compare and contrast with MAN, it has, what, 4 desks for all of T1 and about 6 for T2. Pathetic and backward. The country is an embarassment to arrive back at.

Not my experience on Wednesday. Arrived at Munich to find 3 booths open, and a long queue, just from our flight as far as I could make out, which took 15 minutes to get through. By contrast arrived back at MAN T3 at 2330, and despite a queue was though in under 10 minutes. Neither are a scientific sample, but just to compare and contrast....

wingeel

10th Sep 2010, 08:13

AA will be back next year, at least seasonally. Service is bookable.

Curious Pax

10th Sep 2010, 08:23

No more Air France night-stops.

Looks like more flights. An random Wednesday in November shows the following MAN-CDG departures on the AF website:

0615 AF1899 (op by BE E195)
0640 AF1469 (op by AF 320)
0645 AF1999 (op by BE DH4)
0940 AF1669 (op by AF 321)
1230 AF2099 (op by BE DH4)
1510 AF2269 (op by AF 320)
1705 AF2569 (op by AF E190)

Odd that there are no evening flights, however looking in the booking engine shows an AF 1900 departure from CDG with a 320, and a BE 2055 one with a 195, which suggests that the evening flights will continue. The later AF nightstopper isn't shown, but as one departs the following morning presumably that still happens.

However looking at the BE website it suggests that the current 3 flights continue, with flight number and slight timing changes. The MAN airport website reflects this, and also that the AF flights continue unchanged apart from some slight timing changes.

In summary - for the longest Paris daytrip available you now get to go on a jet, and arrive 35 minutes earlier than previously.

IB4138

10th Sep 2010, 08:23

...and I've mentioned this before, T3 UK Border Control does not have an Iris machine, as it is claimed there is not enough space for one. It is far quicker to clear passport control, if you are a non-EU national. Utter disgrace.

lexxity

10th Sep 2010, 11:03

So if AF and BE are codesharing which carrier is moving terminals?

spannersatcx

10th Sep 2010, 11:50

codesharing doesn't always involve combining 2 flights into 1.

hammerb32

10th Sep 2010, 12:55

Skipness One Echo

10th Sep 2010, 12:58

I know the rationale behind running JFK as summer only as it's primarily a leisure route, what I can't quite get my head round is why the service isn't offered around Xmas and New Year, the demand at this time is massive from m experience....

American and also Air Canada shift a lot of their metal from East <-> West to North <-> South as the Carribbean holds an obvious attraction for frozen North Americans in the Northern Winter. This allows the aircraft to be used fully across the winter season and not just for the mental period over the holidays.

AUTOGLIDE

10th Sep 2010, 13:06

Not my experience on Wednesday. Arrived at Munich to find 3 booths open, and a long queue, just from our flight as far as I could make out, which took 15 minutes to get through. By contrast arrived back at MAN T3 at 2330, and despite a queue was though in under 10 minutes. Neither are a scientific sample, but just to compare and contrast....

The border control posts at MUC are sited in banks at sites all around the terminal, and I'd be surprised if only 3 were open in the whole terminal building - whichever it happened to be. However, with 3 booths it took '15 minutes'. At MAN, with the 3-4 booths on Monday evening it was taking an hour. I've never, ever, arrived at T1 without seeing massive queues.

I also really don't think that only queuing for 10 mins at almost midnight at a tiny 'terminal' like T3 is really such a fantastic success. Such low expectations are perhaps a part of the problem at MAN. I don't queue at FRA for ten mins at any time, even with B777/B744 and A380 pax all arriving.

The serious issue, is that the bother and hassle stops many people from flying. They frankly cannot be bothered with it.

Mr A Tis

10th Sep 2010, 15:19

My last visit thro Munich ( T2)was in July, OK for arrivals as autoglide says. However, departure was another story. There were no effective queue controls on the outbound passport control desks & it took me in the region of 40-45 minutes to get thro. I was early so OK, several others missed their flights causing further queues at the LH service counters. At least in the UK we don't have exit controls ( yet).
I can think of many places a lot worse than MAN. Truth is, it's a lottery, some days good, some days crap, and that applies anywhere you go I'm afraid.

AircraftOperations

10th Sep 2010, 15:35

MAN T1 certainly didn't have "4" desks last week when I flew in. All were open, and I think I remember seeing them numbered up to 10 or 12, plus the electronic gates.

Ringwayman

10th Sep 2010, 17:58

BE shows these departures for weekdays: 0615 (BE), 0645 (BE), 0940 (AF), 1230 (BE), 1510 (AF), 1735 (BE), 1945 (AF)
Weekday arrivals: 0815 (AF), 1015 (BE), 1100 (BE), 1340 (AF), 1635 (BE), 1900 (AF), 2130 (BE)

Vuelo

11th Sep 2010, 20:53

Any news on a MAD service from MAN anytime soon?

The96er

11th Sep 2010, 21:29

MAN-CDG
BE shows these departures for weekdays: 0615 (BE), 0645 (BE), 0940 (AF), 1230 (BE), 1510 (AF), 1735 (BE), 1945 (AF)
Weekday arrivals: 0815 (AF), 1015 (BE), 1100 (BE), 1340 (AF), 1635 (BE), 1900 (AF), 2130 (BE)

With AF operating out of T2 and handled by Swissport and Flybe operating out of T3 and handled by Flightsupport, anyone care to explain how this agreement will function as a single product ??

Mr A Tis

11th Sep 2010, 22:17

With the news from Easy over at Liverpool that winter 10/11

Madrid is double daily on Mondays, Fridays and Sundays.
Berlin is double daily on Mondays, Fridays and Sundays.
Barcelona is going back to double daily.

I guess that kinda nails any chance of a MAN-MAD service from anyone.
Shame the extra flights to MAD / SXF & BCN were not routed to MAN, but EZY seem intent to compete with existing MAN routes rather than start new ones ( eg AMS, HEL, MUC, HAM GOT etc):confused:

Cloud1

11th Sep 2010, 22:46

Now even I am confused by the BE/AF codeshare -

ringwayman - where did you get that schedule from? I have just gone on to Flybe.com and its showing all departures as 'operated by Flybe' with a mix of Q400 and E195 ecolabels coming up.....no mention of AF operating any services.

Ringwayman

11th Sep 2010, 23:04

Very straightforward. You may notice that there are 2 sequences of flight numbers on the BE timetable (I don't see types listed on their online tinetable): those beginning BE31 and those beginning BE74 (that's when you ignore the current block beginning BE72 which end with the summer timetable). If BE is operating all, you would expect them all to be sequential.

Then read OltonPete's post in reply 390 in this thread which is based on the AF website and states that there's 3 AF services. Look at the times that's been quoted for BE operations and it's clearly demonstrated that the BE31 series are those for the Q400 and Emb195 and the ones beginning BE74 are the BE codeshares for the AF services.

donnlass

12th Sep 2010, 20:21

I dont know if I'm going against the subject but please can anyone let me know which Terminal/Gate the A380 goes from?

Is it the same as the regular 777 gate?

Thanks lots

Ringwayman

12th Sep 2010, 20:29

It's gate 12 at the end of Pier B on Terminal 1. Or gate 62 on the West Apron for the "privilged few" as happened this week!

1station

13th Sep 2010, 03:48

In reply to The96er, I am not sure how this can work as you ask with 2 handling agents, it may be the case BE or AF are looking at changing Handling Agents in due course. If this were the case I would imagine AF would be the one to move as it would be an easier shift than BE leaving their current agent.

1station

13th Sep 2010, 03:53

In reply to The96er and how the share will work with different HA's, maybe one airline is looking to change their HA shortly?

Betablockeruk

13th Sep 2010, 09:33

At last!!

Manchester Airport targets London rivals with cheeky advert campaign - Manchester Evening News (http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1321063_manchester_airport_targets_london_rivals_with_cheeky _advert_campaign)

Game on!

Light the blue touch paper and retire to a safe distance :E

MUFC_fan

13th Sep 2010, 09:43

If it takes me all day I'm going to find the post where I said MAN would be resurrected one day! ;)

I just have one question: they are filling all flights up at the moment anyway, so without the extra capacity, what are they advertising for? EK and EY in particular are flying higher and higher.

Also, could I just point out to all those doom mongers regarding F from MAN, EK seem to be doing swimmingly. Roll on 3rd daily flight!:}

comet 4b623PW

13th Sep 2010, 11:05

The problem is where is the one and half million passengers that are bypassing Manchester airport going and which airlines are they using and why are they choosing to use London airports. Placing a few adverts in strategic places around the South East corner Britain is unlikely to change there minds for when they next plan to fly.

MUFC_fan

13th Sep 2010, 11:32

Advertisement is never, ever straightforward.

A prime example is MOL at Ryanair.

What is the whole point of advertisement? For people to recognise the company surely? Who are we talking about now? Who are the newspaper talking about?

Compare the Meerkat is a cr*p advert in itself however it is arguably the best piece of promotional material since the Coca Cola Christmas advert.

mybrico

13th Sep 2010, 12:17

If the proposition of the advertsing is "one stop to the world" almost every airport in the UK can offer that. Direct long haul remains limited forcing passengers to London for non stops or Euro and Middle East hubs. The facts are that passenger numbers are back to the levels of 10 years ago. We dont even have direct services to major European capitals. 18m fly but where are the 8m lost? I cant see this campaign changing things.

Bagso

13th Sep 2010, 12:37

Personally I think the advertising campaign is to be applauded, well done the new MD.

An awful lot of potential passengers have absolutely no idea of the full range of long haul services from The UKs "Capital" provincial airport, fed as they are by the sterotypichal image that London is the "be all and end all".

...interestingly it is NOT just a few billboards, it is also targetted via email at CEOs / Senior Managers in an area of 25m people, North of Birmingham and West of Leeds.

There are more major cities within an hours drive of Manchesters catchment area than any other UK airport, located as it is, slapbang in the middle of the country, Manchester should by any "sensible measure" be their local international airport of choice.

MUFC_fan

13th Sep 2010, 12:51

If the proposition of the advertsing is "one stop to the world" almost every airport in the UK can offer that.

Only LHR, LGW, MAN, BHX, GLA and NCL can offer that guarantee...

Skipness One Echo

13th Sep 2010, 13:07

Only LHR, LGW, MAN, BHX, GLA and NCL can offer that guarantee...

Anyone with a connection into FRA, CDG, AMS or DXB could say that in fairness IMHO. That is more then the above.

MUFC_fan

13th Sep 2010, 13:09

DXB yes, but the others? What flight flies non-stop CDG to SYD? Or FRA for that matter?:confused:

Those are the destinations served from DXB, AUH and/or DOH...

Unless you don't count SYD as a major city?

mickyman

13th Sep 2010, 13:42

MUFC_fan,

Go compare! beats the meerkats hands down!

and dont forget if it wasn't important they wouldn't

do it.

MM

MUFC_fan

13th Sep 2010, 13:45

MUFC_fan,

Go compare! beats the meerkats hands down!

We can differ but we are digressing.

I think the advertisement campaign is something promising from the new man in charge...

Going loco

13th Sep 2010, 19:19

...interestingly it is NOT just a few billboards, it is also targetted via email at CEOs / Senior Managers in an area of 25m people, North of Birmingham and West of Leeds.

There are more major cities within an hours drive of Manchesters catchment area than any other UK airport, located as it is, slapbang in the middle of the country, Manchester should by any "sensible measure" be their local international airport of choice.

Isn't this your 'wanting it both ways at once' logic rearing its head again. Spend months (years?) moaning about centralisation of air services in one place and how the regions are missing out. In the next breath, regions suddenly becomes region and you are making the case for centralising the services of half the country in Manchester. Do the politicians and business leaders of Brum', Leeds, Liverpool... really want this, or are they just as proud of their own regional identities are you are of Manchester's and would actually want to see their own airports develop - arguably at the expense of MAN. I'm not starting a willy waving war here - just pointing out the contradication.

roverman

13th Sep 2010, 22:21

As Going Loco points out, a contradiction could be read into MAN's latest advertising campaign. I read it as a sensible statement put with a touch of humour. We're seeing attrition now, as the always-suspect economics of mass low cost air travel are being questioned, even by one of the main protagonists - see the O'Leary thread elsewhere. Other than to traditional popular holiday destinations and one or two continental hubs, the North of England cannot sustain multiple departure points, the market is too small. Some centralisation is inevitable if direct links from this region to important worldwide destinations are to be maintained. If the northern market is fragmented, Heathrow or Amsterdam will be the main beneficiaries. The 1978 Airports White Paper had it about right, MAN is the gateway airport for northern England, just as Liverpool and Hull are the gateway sea ports. MAN will never rival Heathrow but can sustain direct services to key hubs worldwide if it can be allowed to attain critical mass. The 2003 White Paper which suggested that all UK airports can grow is flawed, as was most economic thinking at that time. MAN is still a publicly owned airport and is run for the public benefit. It still has amongst its stated aims to be run for the economic and social benefit of the region. Perhaps this public ownership should be wider-spread beyond just the immediate local authorities? That region could be the whole of the north of England. The surface links to MAN are already good, and they can get better. The North needs to act together and not like the feuding cities of medieval Italy. Some cities or regions are better placed to act in a certain capacity for the benefit of the whole of northern England. Each has a strength to offer. The privatisation of most airports has made such joined up thinking difficult, but not all may survive in their current form.

lasernigel

14th Sep 2010, 08:04

Flew out to Zurich yesterday morning. Queued on T1 ramp for access to car park 10 mins.
Got into depature hall, jammed with what seemed like an endless queue going somewhere. Checked in and found said queue snaking around hall 3 times was for security. 30 mins to get through.
If security can't cope with high volumes, surely it is time that either flight times are staggered more or seperate security points, one for charter the other for scheduled.

ballyctid

14th Sep 2010, 09:25

Manchester has always been my local airport, I lived in Stockport all my life, I worked at the airport for 19 years for the airline that FlyBe took over. I then had a slight career change and moved to Nottingham.

My new venture sees me flying to destinations all around the world and living in Nottingham I have a big choice, European destinations can be found from EMA, STN, LTN, BHX, LBA, and MAN, I have used them all. I do many a long haul too and have used BHX, MAN and LHR on a regular basis.

After 2 years of using all of the above I will not use MAN again. Everything that has been said in previous posts is true. Queue's are everywhere you look whether outbound or inbound, baggage, security, passport control all take an age, (in my opinion BHX is just as bad).

For all my recent flights I have driven to LHR, easy to get to, easy to park, easy to get through security and easy to retrieve your luggage on return, oh yes and security staff actually smile!.

Unfortunatly all the ad campaigns in the world won't get me back to MAN.

Egerton Flyer

14th Sep 2010, 09:43

business leaders of Brum', Leeds, Liverpool.

The problem is that it will be a long time if ever that Leeds or Liverpool could support long haul routes, its been tried and failed.:{
That's not to say they they shouldn't keep trying.
Birmingham does better but even they are now losing long haul routes.
In my opinion Manchester is the only airport in the north west that has shown it can support long haul.

E.F.

Spotter LBA

14th Sep 2010, 10:47

Yes the New York route failed out of Liverpool but the PIA flights out of Leeds certainly haven't!

MUFC_fan

14th Sep 2010, 10:51

A TATL route operated by CO/UA, DL, US or AA would work from Liverpool but considering it's proximity to MAN I cannot see it happening any time soon.

Bradford has probably the largest (% wise) Pakistani community in the UK - an EK A332 would probably work from LBA! Yet again I cannot see it happening when they are clearly falling deeply in love with MAN.

MAN complains that LHR takes it's passengers yet MAN takes a hell of a lot from LBA, LPL, GLA, EDI, BHX, EMA etc.

Businesstraveller

14th Sep 2010, 11:46

There's also the cost issue as well. There is often a premium (call it something else if you like) when travelling from a regional airport on a longhaul flight. For example, when travelling to Singapore last year with SQ I found MAN fares to be approximately £100 more than the equivilent flights from LHR. As I'm between the two, the choice of LHR was quite simple really. That's aside from the fact that you're more restricted for options (airlines/routes/number of flights per day) when flying from somewhere that isn't LHR.

MUFC_fan

14th Sep 2010, 11:51

I don't think it's down to the 'regional' aspect, it's more due to supply and competition.

LHR is one of, if not THE most competitive long haul airport in the world so therefore SQ has be far more price competitive however good their hard/soft products are. Less supply=higher fares. Ask SRB...

EK at MAN is a prime example, as is SQ. Their prices are higher than they are from any other UK airport, the reason being that there simply isn't enough supply and they are able to get away with charging higher fares.

Simply take a look on EK's website and compare all UK dept points - I will almost guarantee that MAN has the highest fares, certainly in Y anyway...

If Oman, Gulf and, oh I don't know, Cathy, came into MAN, then fares would soon fall. Simple supply and demand.

pwalhx

14th Sep 2010, 12:04

I fly from Manchester on average at least twoce a month, and I cannot remember the last time there was a major queue at check in, security or immigration on return. I am no flying at non peak times either.

Maybe I am lucky or the others are unlucky but the same story can be true at all airports some of the time.

Bagso

14th Sep 2010, 13:06

Isn't this your 'wanting it both ways at once' logic rearing its head again. Spend months (years?) moaning about centralisation of air services in one place and how the regions are missing out. In the next breath, regions suddenly becomes region and you are making the case for centralising the services of half the country in Manchester. Do the politicians and business leaders of Brum', Leeds, Liverpool... really want this, or are they just as proud of their own regional identities are you are of Manchester's and would actually want to see their own airports develop - arguably at the expense of MAN. I'm not starting a willy waving war here - just pointing out the contradication.

Quite frankly it's prop estrous to compare Manchester to Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool etc, they are in the wrong location, they do not have the transport links and in some instances are limited by both demand and indeed capacity.
Based on major populations centres then yes for "half the country" Manchester is much more convenient.

Granted there will always be exceptions, of course there will be some niche services that will be successful but Manchester is the only credible platform that can support a wider range of LH services.

It is centrally located and can therefore attract passengers not just from Manchester, a massive provincial capital in its own right it can also attract pax from regions on the margins as well. It is the second most popular overseas inward destination outside London so the traffic is not just one way, that is another important factor. With three terminals and two runways and vast apron space, it has the infrastructure to cope.

The question is whether it can be made more "commercially attractive" in terms of fare structures etc and also whether it can break the perception of simply being classed as nothing more than a regional airport.

Skipness One Echo

14th Sep 2010, 13:34

I don't think it's down to the 'regional' aspect, it's more due to supply and competition.

LHR is one of, if not THE most competitive long haul airport in the world so therefore SQ has be far more price competitive however good their hard/soft products are. Less supply=higher fares. Ask SRB...

With that logic fares at Heathrow are low and airlines are paying mentally high prices to offer basement fares? It's not that simple of course, the front end are cross-subsidising the back end and there's more front end in London remember. This is part of the reason regional direct flying is more expensive in economy.

MUFC_fan

14th Sep 2010, 15:05

With that logic fares at Heathrow are low and airlines are paying mentally high prices to offer basement fares? It's not that simple of course, the front end are cross-subsidising the back end and there's more front end in London remember. This is part of the reason regional direct flying is more expensive in economy.

Obviously my point was very much black and white and in what is known as a 'perfect' economy.

Your point is very much valid also and goes to show that there are tens of different factors involved however, EK offer the same A380 on LHR and MAN routes yet fares are higher from MAN...

Skipness One Echo

14th Sep 2010, 15:16

Spread of more F and C over 2 A380s and 3 B77Ws means Y fares can be lower than MAN with 1 A380 and 1 B77W. Plus the fact that high fares discourage people from flying to "Manchester" in "North Britain". It's the only way to stop people flying there.

Now excuse me while I run away at speed....

42psi

14th Sep 2010, 15:17

Obviously my point was very much black and white and in what is known as a 'perfect' economy.

Your point is very much valid also and goes to show that there are tens of different factors involved however, EK offer the same A380 on LHR and MAN routes yet fares are higher from MAN...

There is also the "we charge what we can" aspect .....

prices aren't set by working out the cost and then adding a percentage .. the market is also looked at and once your costs are covered you price according to what you think the market will cough up.

Many years ago heard a wonderful radio interview with a Ford Motor Co. exec getting lambasted as to why the same car in the rest of europe cost less than in the UK.

Interviewer had been building up to the interview for some time and going on about digging into and getting answers etc...

His response was, we charge what we think the market will pay .. if we get it wrong we don't sell enough cars. We're in business to make as much profit as we can.

Sort of blew the rest of the interview out the window....

MUFC_fan

14th Sep 2010, 15:21

Spread of more F and C over 2 A380s and 3 B77Ws means Y fares can be lower than MAN with 1 A380 and 1 B77W.

Very true. However you also cannot avoid the fact of the 10s of other airlines flying East in direct competition...

There is also the "we charge what we can" aspect .....

prices aren't set by working out the cost and then adding a percentage .. the market is also looked at and once your costs are covered you price according to what you think the market will cough up.

It's called supply and demand. PED is king!

Skipness One Echo

14th Sep 2010, 15:38

Very true. However you also cannot avoid the fact of the 10s of other airlines flying East in direct competition...

Greater competition is an acknowledged fact I grant you but look at the yields that are possible. Consider why Continental spent "eye watering" money to move to Heathrow rather than add capacity elsewhere.

MUFC_fan

14th Sep 2010, 15:45

Greater competition is an acknowledged fact I grant you but look at the yields that are possible. Consider why Continental spent "eye watering" money to move to Heathrow rather than add capacity elsewhere.

I completely agree - LHR is a cash cow yet why are MAN fares higher in Y and J?

roverman

14th Sep 2010, 21:14

This interesting piece of news could raise the possibility of MAN getting a direct service to India?

Air India to shut down ?inefficient? Frankfurt hub | ATW Online (http://atwonline.com/airports-routes/news/air-india-shut-down-inefficient-frankfurt-hub-0912)

Going loco

14th Sep 2010, 22:17

Quite frankly it's prop estrous to compare Manchester to Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool etc, they are in the wrong location, they do not have the transport links and in some instances are limited by both demand and indeed capacity.Based on major populations centres then yes for "half the country" Manchester is much more convenient.

I don't disagree. If the plan was for a Northern / Midlands superhub, I'd recommend MAN too. There isn't, so it's a moot point.

The point of my post was to highlight how you seem to flit between moaning that the UK regions "suffer" because of airlines focussing on one place (i.e London) and then advocating that, er....wouldn't it be great if airlines focussed all their efforts in one place (i..e Manchester). You've written chapter and verse on how BA have stopped MAN reaching it's full potential, but seem quite happy for lots of other airports not to reach their own potential just so MAN can benefit.

hammerb32

15th Sep 2010, 12:48

Quote:
Quite frankly it's prop estrous to compare Manchester to Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool etc, they are in the wrong location, they do not have the transport links and in some instances are limited by both demand and indeed capacity.Based on major populations centres then yes for "half the country" Manchester is much more convenient.

Bagso,

Would agree that LPL and LBA aren't the easiest of places to get to but I can't think of another airport in the UK so well connected to transport as BHX, on the West Coast mainline, direct links the M6 and M42 etc. The key for MAN is that geographically it's in the centre of 3 major urban connurbation, Merseyside, Gtr Manchester and West Yourkshire, add to that Lancashire, South Yorks and North Wales you're probably looking at it being in the centre of about 10 million people. Add to that again the West and East Mids down the road you've got another 4.5 million within a 90 minute drive.

In my humble MAN is the only airport outside of the South East that's not a regional airport. It's the main hub for a good chunk of England and probably south Scotlands population, LPL, LBA and BHX primarily serve their metropolitan area. The issue MAN has, as documented here, is that fares are high from the airport, choice is now much more widely available. Hypothetic example, Mr Jones in Stretford wants to go to Dubai, from MAN it's £600, from BHX it's £450, Mr Jones may well say the £150 saving is worth the 90 minute drive down the road. The adverts referred to are therefore a good play to ensure people in the aformentioned areas consider MAN as their hub.

That's my view anyway.....

Bagso

15th Sep 2010, 13:04

]The point of my post was to highlight how you seem to flit between moaning that the UK regions "suffer" because of airlines focusing on one place (i.e. London) and then advocating that, er....wouldn't it be great if airlines focussed all their efforts in one place (i..e Manchester). You've written chapter and verse on how BA have stopped MAN reaching it's full potential, but seem quite happy for lots of other airports not to reach their own potential just so MAN can benefit. [/I]

Going Loco

I am confused by your argument ?

I'm not actually suggesting they focus on one place far from it, but lets "within reason" put demand where it originates, rather than artificially funnel it through one hub, having said that, the originating airports do at least have to be able to support that demand !

I applaud Easyjet, Jet2 and Ryanair who now run a massive range of service to European destinations from provincial airports that would have been unheard of 15 years ago, I am not sure any of my comments have ever said these should all go into Manchester ?

Long haul is different, EK have demonstrated that they can offer viable multiple frequency to the regions, Newcastle, Birmingham , Glasgow etc, but there are few airlines who could (or more critically would) want to do this.

I am simply pointing out that Heathrow and the surrounding airspace is pretty much full, the next best option is therefore Manchester unless we want to lose traffic to other European airports. Manchester is surely more convenient for potential passengers who live North Of Birmingham in cities like Leeds Liverpool etc, but aside from a few niche services, its folly to suggest that these airports could support a vast increase in schedules given the current mix of fares and profits generated by consolidation as we see at Heathrow.

If you can suggest another regional airport that has the infrastructure but can also put forward a viable case to support a massive increase of passengers whilst still returning good yields for airlines based on hubbing then by all means "suggestions on a postcard".

Skipness One Echo

15th Sep 2010, 13:56

put demand where it originates, rather than artificially funnel it through one hub

The word "artificial" is an odd choice. Heathrow is a natural hub being the crossroads of the empire and North American routes from the days of BOAC serving a world city. I make the point that there is a very good case IMHO that London not be considered simply as a major English city as it's not that English these days let's be honest. Population and airspace are only part of the issue, a great misunderstanding that London is a major cultural and economic magnet that few cities in the world can compete with.

As far as the South East is concerned, when you say the next best option is therefore Manchester unless we want to lose traffic to other European airports. you're right, but London looks outwards not upwards. The attraction to use the existing hub at CDG or AMS would always come to mind before heading up to Manchester. It's a pretty big cultural thing that you're really not going to get past.

Manchester gaining anything from a saturated South East has been the mantra for decades and it still hasn't happenend. When the day comes, the Blue / Yellow / Red politicians of the day will "reluctantly" allow mixed mode at Heathrow before dusting off runway three.

It's like the BBC. Moving to Manchester has great benefits on paper until you compare it to living in London. Finally the reason MAN's grand plan went wrong was that with the resurgence of LPL and LBA, those passengers chose to fly locally rather than be "artificially" funnelled into MAN.

I think it would have been better strategically had they been funnelled towrads a MAN that had been better invested in as I don't believe we need so many regional airports. A few well run larger fields would be way better I think. Glasgow and Edinburgh I'm looking at you.......

simoncorbett

15th Sep 2010, 18:00

As a regular user of BHX i have found it very noticeable that the world outside of europe only ever sees 'LONDON' as the option to catch a flight to,most US visitors even when they are going to Stratford upon avon or Warwick for a weekend fly to London........ i do realise they have a choice of many flights perday which helps aswell.
So what we need to change is the names of the airports......
Birmingham could be London quite a bit north,Manchester could be London very north etc...

Simon

mytravela330

15th Sep 2010, 18:19

i cant understand why no-one has tried to re-launch a direct LA service

mickyman

15th Sep 2010, 18:19

Simon,

As in 'Ryanair' the map you mean.........very good idea - that'll sort it!

MM

clareview

15th Sep 2010, 19:32

This story has been doing the rounds for a couple of months with various places being suggested to replace Frankfurt as an Air India hub. The most speculation was about Dublin even though its runway lenght potentially created problems. Anyway the latest from India a couple of weeks ago is that as the B777's can fly non stop from Delhi to North American Frankfurt could close without a successor and passengers from elsewhere in India would transfer from internal services to the US flights in Delhi

Betablockeruk

15th Sep 2010, 20:12

i cant understand why no-one has tried to re-launch a direct LA service

Yes, at least 1 west coast service would be welcome. I suppose VS LAS will be a reasonable tester how far a successful west direct service can be. Even better would be a MAN-LAS-AKL :}

chiglet

15th Sep 2010, 21:37

Whilst the "Legacy Carriers/Major Airlines" fly Long Haul out of the Cash Cow aka London....the "Region"s haven't got a chance.
Friends of mine booked BA MAN-JFK. "If you go by LHR, we will upgrade you to Club, and chauffer you from your home to LHR and back"
Support your local airport.......:ugh:

TSR2

15th Sep 2010, 23:01

Friends of mine booked BA MAN-JFK. "If you go by LHR, we will upgrade you to Club, and chauffer you from your home to LHR and back"

I flew that route many times on a FULL FARE economy ticket and it never happened to me.

lasernigel

16th Sep 2010, 10:18

Came in last night from Zurich. Travelator now gone..why?? Still stupid down and up the stairs again. Baggage took 30 mins plenty of empty carosels but 3 flights on number 3...bad planning or what??:ugh:

Skipness One Echo

16th Sep 2010, 11:09

I suppose VS LAS will be a reasonable tester how far a successful west direct service can be. Even better would be a MAN-LAS-AKL

The question you need to answer before you get a shiny new MAN-LAX service is this one :

Given that LHR-LAX barely makes money as there is so much competition on price from London-Hub-West Coast such that the LHR-LAX direct has very competitve prices, how do you exepct to make MAN-LAX pay given that substantial discounts will exist going over the usual hubs. The market is super price sensitive and even MAN's US carriers will still offer a better deal over EWR, ORD, PHL, JFK and ATL.

The economics don't add up for a year round scheduled service.

Alvechurch

16th Sep 2010, 12:30

Bagso

I'm afraid your claim that Manchester is at the centre of the country won't convince too many people and do you really think that BHX hasn't got good transport links?
The last time you jumped on this particular bandwagon you failed to answer a rather basic question - if London and the South East suffered restrictions which resulted in passengers having to fly long haul from regional airports, why would anyone want to drive past BHX or not get off the train there and instead travel on to Manchester?
In those circumstances if BHX had the right routes those passengers would surely travel up from the South and use them?

mickyman

16th Sep 2010, 14:40

Alvechurch

'why would anyone want to drive past BHX or not get off the train there and instead travel on to Manchester?'
The opposite argument is being used ie: Why should 'Northerners' travel
by air/road/rail to go long haul at LHR ??
With the advent of 'global airline alliances' the argument of 'funnelling'
passengers through hubs applies to all airlines not just BA at LHR.
The success of airlines like Emirates etc at MAN may proove that some
routes would be able to maintain numbers (but not as some on here guestimate)and yields.
Whilst the 3rd LHR runway remains on the backburner MAN may gain
one or two 'practise' routes with the promise of transfer, when the city applies pressure on politicians to build R3.The politicians can only pay
lip-service to the masses before market forces take-over the decision
process.

MM.

MUFC_fan

16th Sep 2010, 15:20

Whilst the 3rd LHR runway remains on the backburner MAN may gain
one or two 'practise' routes with the promise of transfer, when the city applies pressure on politicians to build R3.The politicians can only pay
lip-service to the masses before market forces take-over the decision
process.

Quite simply, the most intelligent comment ever made on this forum.

Bagso

16th Sep 2010, 16:27

Alvechurch

..I absolutely agree !

BHX is ideally placed.

With fast rail links central London would not be much different in time to LGW, in addition a sizeable chunk of the North of England would be within 50mins, it was a major opportunity missed !

I say "missed" because the runway length and indeed to a certain degree terminal capacity will always be an issue that will restrict operations.
Full length/full load departures to all "possible" desinations are just not possible!

In addition, its proximity to London may be an advantage or indeed the opposite. Gatwick doesnt quite work and neither does Stansted because LH airlines in particular will not split costs so near to Heathrow.

The points I raised re Manchester addressed all issues ! Its far enough away to at least have its own identity.

Yes Birmingham and possibly other airports "might" score as well as MAN in individual areas but not on all points.

Going loco

16th Sep 2010, 18:59

Going Loco

I am confused by your argument ?

I'm not actually suggesting they focus on one place far from it, but lets "within reason" put demand where it originates, rather than artificially funnel it through one hub, having said that, the originating airports do at least have to be able to support that demand !

But as anyone who understands UK traffic patterns will testify to, MAN handles a huge amount of traffic that comes from areas where MAN would not be first or in some cases even second choice for the consumer. In otherwords the big shiny airport you are so proud of is built on a principle of "artifically funnelling" passenger that you seem to fundamentally disagree with.

Rationally of course, there are very valid economic reasons why businesses like TUI, Thomas Cook, Lufthansa, Air France and even BA on the shuttle "artifically funnel" their Northern passengers into MAN rather than offering more convenient options. They are the same economic reasons you won't be seeing BA doing anything interesting in MAN either. You can't moan about the latter when it doesn't meet your view of the world, but quietly ignore the former when it adds passengers and benefits to MAN that wouldn't be there otherwise.

I say "missed" because the runway length and indeed to a certain degree terminal capacity will always be an issue that will restrict operations.
Full length/full load departures to all "possible" desinations are just not possible!

But even if there are long haul flights squeezed out of LHR, it will the thickest routes first e.g. New York, which should be doable from many UK airports. Transferring West Coast US, Asia Pacific, LATAM services will be very unlikely

purplehelmet

17th Sep 2010, 09:28

manchester's t1 evacuated this morning at 0850 due to suspicsous parcel being found in the terminal, causing major disruption to all flights.
more details at. www.menmedia.co.uk (http://www.menmedia.co.uk)

750XL

17th Sep 2010, 10:24

Any idea if T1 is open now?

Betablockeruk

17th Sep 2010, 10:42

Was still evacuated at 1110.

Betablockeruk

17th Sep 2010, 11:07

Manchester Airport's Terminal One re-opening after evacuation - Manchester Evening News (http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1328183_manchester_airports_terminal_one_reopening_after_eva cuation)

Just in time for the Emirates due at 1223.

Bagso

17th Sep 2010, 13:11

I]But as anyone who understands UK traffic patterns will testify to, MAN handles a huge amount of traffic that comes from areas where MAN would not be first or in some cases even second choice for the consumer. In otherwords the big shiny airport you are so proud of is built on a principle of "artifically funnelling" passenger that you seem to fundamentally disagree with. [/I]

Going Loco - No, not particularly proud of Manchester just making some common sense arguments about what we do about capacity constraints in the South East. If you look back at previous threads I did actually suggest that a possible answer to this, is to build a brand new world class airport with 6/8 runways and close Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted Luton etc BUT what do we do in the meantime ? However I digress....

I'll bow to your obvious knowledge in this area clearly I am not worthy, but could you substantiate your argument regarding the "huge amount of traffic" that Manchester handles from "outside of area" with some actual figures ? My own understanding is that these are insignificant but I am happy to be corrected.

Are you really suggesting that potential pax from say Birmingham, Bristol, Norwich etc are really traveling on road and rail up to Manchester, bypassing not only their local airport offering connecting service to Paris Amsterdam, Frankfurt etc but ALSO completely dismissing the fact that Heathrow is within a 90 minute drive and would be more convenient and would no doubt offer lower fares and higher frequency versus Manchester flights !

Rationally of course, there are very valid economic reasons why businesses like TUI, Thomas Cook, Lufthansa, Air France and even BA on the shuttle "artifically funnel" their Northern passengers into MAN rather than offering more convenient options.

.....No, lost me on that one as well, can you explain what you mean ?

hammerb32

17th Sep 2010, 16:56

The thing of it, no matter how constrained the runways in the South East get, a solution will always be found to protect the South Easts interests. There's so many examples, look at Crossrail, billions to fund, the cost of this alone would provide an extensive light rail network to service the whole of the West Mids, we're spending this on 1 rail line to protect the South Easts interests, I say we because it's the tax payer funded it.

Arts funding is another example, government grants for the British Museum in London for the last 12 months are more than has been given the West Mids ever, that's 1 museum. I'm using the West Mids as an example but in reality it could be anywhere in the UK.

A third runway will be built at Heathrow, reality is the economy of the surounding area is to reliant on it not to and to reliant on it to mount any sort of realistic oppostion. In typical British style though it will be long after it should have been and until then we'll just muddle through.

mytravela330

17th Sep 2010, 17:54

i cant see a third runway been built at LHR, this goverment will be in power for 5 years, then all the planning has to go through again, and then and only then if it was to be passed, it will take another 3-4 years to build..... and where will they get the extra money to pay the people in the 700 houses they will have to bulldoze...

hammerb32

18th Sep 2010, 14:53

I would suggest the 700 houses is the cheap bit, they've found the best part of £20 billion for the 1 new rail line across London, it will come.

Ian Brooks

18th Sep 2010, 17:59

It`s not the money, Con/Lib were very against it for it`s green credentials or lack of
and destroying a complete community.
If they cut all the domestic and Northern France/Belgium flights and had a high
speed link direct from airport it would free a vast number of slots for much more profitable flights

Ian B

Going loco

18th Sep 2010, 19:11

I'll bow to your obvious knowledge in this area clearly I am not worthy, but could you substantiate your argument regarding the "huge amount of traffic" that Manchester handles from "outside of area" with some actual figures ? My own understanding is that these are insignificant but I am happy to be corrected.

It's about 1/3rd. So, about 6 million today and 7.5 million back in the day. Write to the CAA and ask for the supporting data from CAP 775, CAP 754, CR 07 and CR 08. There's many different but corroborating data points

Prestonrdr

19th Sep 2010, 16:55

Going Loco

I have been reading the brick bats batted back and forth between yourself and Bagso with interest. Could I arbitrate ?

You have challenged his/her opinion BUT curiously have quoted documents that fully validate the other persons argument ?

To quote your documents, yes of course Manchester handles traffic from other areas, to a greater or lesser extent every airport does, BUT critically looking at the papers, the vast majority of the 6m passengers coming in from out of area, come specifically from East Midlands and Yorkshire, both are "adjoining regions which are a relative short drive or train journey.

Neither region has airports which could sustain scheduled long haul traffic, so they are hardly being funnelled into the NWest at the expense of other airports unless you are advocating direct long haul service to EVERY regional airport in Britain ?

The point of the argument is that the North Of England has a major airport which is underused at a time when UK capacity, albeit dominated by the South East is under severe pressure. Maybe there is an argument for a more equal distribution although commercial interests do seem to prevent this.

Going loco

19th Sep 2010, 21:45

I suppose if all 6m were travelling to MAN to catch long-haul that might be the case, but is that what the data says? MAN only has 3m long haul in total and that includes charter, so not sure the long haul argument holds water. So what about the short haul traffic. Probably 4m - 5m coming from Yorks, Merseyside, East Mids - why shouldn't that be picked up by the airports that can handle that traffic. Why wouldn't posters on here who've made a name for themselves by arguing so strongly that regional airports should handle the traffic a region generates, actually be supportive of that? As I said from the start, double standards surely?

Ringwayman

19th Sep 2010, 22:13

mickyman

19th Sep 2010, 23:23

Ringwayman

Insert LHR for your MAN and we are back to square one - are we not?

MM

TURIN

20th Sep 2010, 08:28

Enough of this pontificating.

Down to important matters.
Anyone working at the airport has probably seen this already and made their own arrangements.

For everyone else, good luck. October will not be a good time to be running late.

Dear All,

Please could I give you advanced notice of the following series of roadworks planned for the coming months.

Outwood Lane Resurfacing

Manchester City Council is to resurface Outwood Lane between the M56/Hilton junction and the roundabout at the T1/T3 end. The programme has to be confirmed, but we anticipate work starting late September/beginning October. From our initial discussions with MCC and contractor Tarmac, we expect the work will need be undertaken overnight with diversions for T1 and T3 traffic. We'll update this once we have a more detailed programme and method statement, from MCC and Tarmac.

A538 Road Tunnel Maintenance

Starting Monday 27th September for two weeks, maintenance of the R1 and R2 tunnels on the A538. No road closures, but there will be lane closures and switching traffic to contraflow system in the open tunnel.

M56 Motorway Spur - Exit Carriageway Resurfacing

The Highways Agency plan to resurface the Airport Spur exit lanes working over four nights between 22.00 and 05.00 commencing Monday 11 October. Traffic will be diverted to the M56 via Thorley Lane and Runger Lane and Junction 6. The road works will not affect traffic coming into the airport.

M56 Junction 7 Bowden View Bridge Replacement

The Highways Agency are replacing the bridge carrying traffic off the M56 at Jn 7 and onto the A556. The plan is demolish the bridge during the weekend 2/3rd October, and install the new bridge on the following weekend 9/10 October. The M56 west bound will be closed to traffic during both weekends. East bound traffic will be able to use the eastbound Jn 7 entry and exit slips. Between the two weekends, westbound traffic heading for the M6 south will not be able to use the A556, and will be diverted via jn 10 of the M56. The HA's variable message signs will sign diversions for Manchester Airport traffic.

Metrolink

Work will start on the Airport Metrolink line at the end of 2010. Initial work will be on diverting services on Outwood Lane, and later in 2011,on the retaining wall structure alongside the Hilton Hotel. As work progresses, there will be a need for traffic management around the Hilton area on Outwood Lane.

Further updates will follow as these projects progress.

Kind regards,

Betablockeruk

20th Sep 2010, 09:44

US Airways announce CLT - DUB and CLT - MAD but no CLT -MAN! After all our "pontificating" an expected new service fails to materialise. :*

Going loco

20th Sep 2010, 10:10

So instead of an airline operating 1 service profitably into 1 airport with large catchment areas you'd want that airline operating into 3, 4 or 5 airports unprofitably because you object to MAN being the beneficiary?

Absolutely not. No objection from me at all. I'm simply pointing out you can't have it both ways. You personally have led attacks on BA and when the very rational argument above has been used to explain why BA have acted as they have, you don't accept it.

Anyway, let's move on.

Milan N

21st Sep 2010, 16:47

Does anybody know why RW lights are on with opposite direction in MAN?
Photos: Airbus A330-243 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/BMI-British-Midland/Airbus-A330-243/0258227/L/)

Will_McKenzie

21st Sep 2010, 17:46

Most likely for lighting test purposes, would be on at the other end too though one would hope!!

Milan N

21st Sep 2010, 17:56

Maybe you are right but i'm not sure they can switch on both direction simultaneously.

Anna's Dad

21st Sep 2010, 19:23

Milan N - I am pretty confident that is the correct answer. I have been down in that area to take photos of 23R departures and the lights have been switched on (for 05L) as in the photo. Then a couple of guys have turned up in a 'lighting' van to visually inspect what the lights are doing.

It is great for the photos!

Milan N

21st Sep 2010, 20:02

Thank's! :-)

Ringwayman

21st Sep 2010, 22:19

august figures:

Movements down 3.56% to 16140 (but with an increase in domestic movements?!)

Passengers (terminal):
Dom down 9,1% to 208955
Int up 1.2% to 1092318
cht down 6.2% to 790427
pvt down 54.4% to 215
Overall.... down 2.83% to 2091219

With transit included:
down 2.62% to 2110515

Freight: up 14.0% to 10639 tonnes

Moving annual total = 17639249 or down 8.8% and cargo 115151 tonnes, up 7%

So the decreasing passengers continues to occur but the odd glimmer of decent prospects for the year with the international scheduled passenger numbers increasing.

So far it appears no news coming out of the World Routes Forum.

Curious Pax

22nd Sep 2010, 14:02

I would suspect that next month will see another small drop, but October onwards will start climbing, as the Ryanair withdrawal last year will have filtered through, added to the increase in pax from the EK/EY equipment upgrades etc.

easyJet Jack

23rd Sep 2010, 10:11

Just looked at MAN airport departures and arrivals info board and it seems up until 08:00 this morning most flight were departing 2-3 hours late.

Anyone know what the cause of this was? Surely French ATC still aren't striking?

eJJ

ben_keghead

23rd Sep 2010, 10:17

The French have gone on General strike today, so most of France is at a standstill, including the ATC!

Johnny F@rt Pants

23rd Sep 2010, 10:18

Surely French ATC still aren't striking?

Oh yes they are, and today's the BIG day, hence all the delays:{

Spanish next on 29th allegedly:{:{

DCS99

23rd Sep 2010, 10:18

Anyone know if children are being put through the new T1 Scanners?

Am flying in again soon with a 7 year old who I know won't react too well.

http://www.manchesterairport.co.uk/manweb.nsf/Content/X-Ray-Scanners-Public-Information

Will Children be forced to use the Scanner?

The use of Body Scanners is compatible with the Protection of Children Act 1978 and we are confident the introduction of these scanners is a proportionate and necessary step in enhancing security for passengers.
The Government directive authorising the use of body scanners by airports does not exempt children because this would undermine the effectiveness of these new security measures.
All Airport staff viewing the images will have already undergone a criminal record check which includes checking for offences against children.

Shed-on-a-Pole

23rd Sep 2010, 11:13

DCS99 / All,

With respect, ALL kids in Britain today are going to have to get used to passing through security X-Ray machines for the rest of their lives. A sad reflection on the times maybe, but true nonetheless. These machines are only going to proliferate, and don't be surprised to see them in major railway termini and shopping centres in a few years time.

Surely the best approach is not to make an issue of the X-Ray machine in front of the kids. If you show anxiety or self-conscious behaviour they will pick up on it and stress. If you just pass through with no fuss and a nonchalant demeanour, they will do the same without a second thought. Get them used to these machines now and they will not have hang-ups about using them in later life. Don't induce a phobia in them.

If your young child asks about the X-Ray machines, just explain that their purpose is to ensure that no bad person can smuggle a weapon onto an aircraft. That is the simple truth and safety is paramount. If you pursue the myth of a bogeyman behind the machine (like the monster under the bed) you will only stress the child unnecessarily. There is no paedo hiding behind the scenes seeking a cheap thrill from an X-ray image of your kid (just how thrilling is that???). What there is behind the scenes is a professional team dedicated to protecting the safety of yourself, your kids, and all your fellow travelers.

So when you reach the X-Ray machine at Manchester T1 or any other location, just stroll through it with minimum fuss. Your kids will follow your example and think nothing of it. Then they will take travel security procedures in their stride for the rest of their lives. No hang-ups, no issues. That's got to be a good thing, hasn't it?

Cheers, SHED.