MANCHESTER - 8

[Bab_zz]

PK 782 flight which has been diverted to Stockholm from Toronto due to a bomb threat will be flying to MAN and arriving at 5pm GMT. Departure to Karachi will be 6:30PM GMT. Arrival into MAN is due to change of crew

[lexxity]

There's no smoking area airside T3 at MAN.

[wanna_be_there]

Biman Bangladesh have re-requested slots at MAN for a 2nd November start. DAC-MAN-JFK-MAN-DAC on a 2 weekly basis.
May actually be a step closer this time, as Manchester and New York had previously been removed from the website, but have now been re-stated, saying 'flights suspended until further notice'.
Shame you can book but a good step forward.
Also, DAC-MAN-JFK arrives at 03:00 and leaves at 04:30, and the return is 22:30ish, so no good for any spotters out there.

[Suzeman]

Also, DAC-MAN-JFK arrives at 03:00 and leaves at 04:30, and the return is 22:30ish, so no good for any spotters out there.
Only true if

1) the service actually operates this time around and

2) it is always on time.......;)

Suzeman

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

The news report in which BMI Regional confirm their withdrawal from the ABZ-BHX schedule wef October 29th goes on to state that ABZ-MAN frequency will rise to 6 x daily Mon-Fri. This will fill a capacity gap in the afternoon schedule according to the report.

[easyflyer83]

Good news re: Biman. Believe it when I see it mind.

[TURIN]

Also, DAC-MAN-JFK arrives at 03:00 and leaves at 04:30, and the return is 22:30ish, so no good for any spotters out there.

No good for any bu66er at silly 'o'clock in the morning. Nightshift anyone? :ouch:

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

FLYBE has just announced new routes from Manchester to Aberdeen (18 rotations per week) and Nantes (4 rotations per week). Both services commence in early December and use Q400 equipment.
A bit of positive news for a change.

SHED.

[wanna_be_there]

and bmi just increased MAN-ABZ to 6 daily, so thats 9 flights weekdays!
This fight is going to be interesting, will bmi have the balls to stick at it?

[Trash_Hauler]

I don't see BD having the bottle for a long fight with BE over ABZ... That said, they (BD) have had the route to themselves for quite some time, and I know they have a lot of "regulars". TBH, I am really surprised that it took this long for BE to enter the fray.

[johnnychips]

With 9 flights that's a capacity of c.450 each way. There can't be that many oilmen! (yes I know about yields!)

[Curious Pax]

Although I can't remember the number of flights operated, don't forget that MAN-ABZ managed to support both BA (in it's various regional guises) and bmi at the same time for a number of years.

[AircraftOperations]

Flew out of T2 last night and was given the impression by the groundstaff that AF would not be located in T2 for much longer.
Is this right? Surely they couldn't be going to T3 with BE - But then I can't see it being T1 either.

[750XL]

Would've thought KLM would have to move too if AF changed terminal as they share check in desks etc?

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

I have just received an e.mail from FlyBe promoting their Winter programme from Manchester. Whilst 14 destinations are listed, I note the absence of MAN-NWI, MAN-MSE and MAN-EXT (plus seasonals which are to be expected). Can anybody confirm whether these three routes are getting the chop, going seasonal, or are they just excluded from the list by oversight (pretty unlikely I would have thought). Thanks in advance for any info provided.

SHED.

Edit: I have noticed that the promotion focuses on weekend breaks. Perhaps these routes are excluded because they don't offer a Sunday operation?

[The96er]

Quoting AircraftOperations - "Flew out of T2 last night and was given the impression by the groundstaff that AF would not be located in T2 for much longer.
Is this right? Surely they couldn't be going to T3 with BE - But then I can't see it being T1 either"


This is a question I've asked on this forum before with no answer. As we know, AF and Flybe are to share the route MAN-CDG between them, however, Flybe operate out of T3 and are handled by Flightsupport and AF/KLM out of T2 and handled by Swissport. Flybe are unlikely to move from T3, so does this mean AF moving to T3 and switching handling agents ?? - would KLM move with them ??.
What is interesting too is that you can book a flight after OCT 31 to CDG on the Flybe website which includes the flights flown by AF but if you try to book from the AF site, all available options are via AMS on KLM !

[Le Bob]

I'm booked on flights to NWI in December and January mid-week. Must be weekend promotions.

[easyflyer83]

I've seen BE flights on the AF website.

[TSR2]

Picked up my daughter from Terminal 3 last night. The plane landed at 23.31 and she cleared the airport complete with checked-in baggage by 23.49. Well done Terminal 3 staff.

[lasernigel]

Quoting AircraftOperations - "Flew out of T2 last night and was given the impression by the groundstaff that AF would not be located in T2 for much longer.
Is this right? Surely they couldn't be going to T3 with BE - But then I can't see it being T1 either"


Thought the idea was muted just over a year ago when it was said, all charter flights will go from T2 and scheduled from T1 and T3.

[pwalhx]

Can I ask a question then in reagrd to code sharing, if 2 airlines code share on a route do they have to be handled by the same handling agent and do they have to operate from the same terminal?

Surely all that is happening is they add their own flight number, what is the necessity to operate from the same terminal as long as the passenger is clearly informed what terminal the flight operates from does it really matter?

[wanna_be_there]

as long as the passenger is clearly informed what terminal the flight operates from does it really matter?

Because it doesnt matter how much in advance you tell them, there will still be lots of people who will se T3 on their ticket, but then see a sign saying AF are at T2 and it will confuse them.
Passengers in holiday mode are some of the doziest people you will come across.

[pwalhx]

My question is irrelevant anyway as the airport website shows Air France and City Jet are moving to Terminal 3.

However I would still suggest for example is you have a Qantas flight number on a BA flight from say London to Hong Kong you will fly from T5 and not T3 as with a normal Qantas flgiht (forgive me if I have the wrong terminal at Heathrow) merely an example of my point.

[The96er]

My question is irrelevant anyway as the airport website shows Air France and City Jet are moving to Terminal 3.

So one would assume that Air France are to be handled by Flightsupport no ?? - KLM to remain it T2 too !

[AircraftOperations]

Didn't take long for Cityjet to move back then.

The reason why it might matter which terminal an airline flies from - from my point of view - is T3 large enough to support the AF operation?
Will service levels drop? Longer security queues at peak times (for all pax), plus there aren't nearly as many things to do/buy in T3 for those AF frequent fliers who are used to T2.

[johnnychips]

And no smoking! Really liked the Antwerp move to T2. Oh well.

[Scottie Dog]

Courtesy of Airline Route

British Airways will at last start code-sharing ex-Manchester

AA054/AA055 BA1500/BA1501 Chicago/Manchester/Chicago

AA210/AA211 BA1552/BA553 New York/Manchester/New York

It seems to have been a long time coming, but maybe we will now see BA start to promote Manchester.

Scottie Dog

[Ringwayman]

Thought BA already codeshared ORD as BA 5108/5107?

[conti onepass]

would the new york be better as the BA1503/2 .

[Ian Brooks]

Some interesting fares direct
Not a lot of help me thinks!

Ian B

[mytravela330]

Do we realy want to see BA back at Manchester opperating long haul flights just cos their worried that another airline will make money on a route they once opperated... its just like the Ryan Air story not long ago, they pull out cos they dont get their own way, someone else starts to opperate the routes they once did and because its back fired at leeds bradford, he wants to come back to Manchester, well if Ryan Air want Manchester that much, then it shouldnt bother them if they get a new concession or not..:D

[TURIN]

Mytravela330

Some of us rely on the airport to pay our wages, so to answer your question, yes we do need them back. We need all we can get these days.

[Ian Brooks]

I don`t agree on that Turin as they just come in wipe everbody else of route
and then they leave us at the drop of a hat because they have a spat with management or the government or handling agent, leaving us with nothing having paid the airport
nothing for having the pleasure of them NOT.
Lets stick to AF/LH/BE/LX and U2 who all support MAN and pay towards the
running costs.

Ian B

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

mytravel A330 -

I am intrigued by your suggestion that Ryanair's LBA operation has "backfired" and that the airline wishes to return to MAN as a consequence. Is this just a bit of wishful thinking on your part or do you have some reliably sourced information to back up the claim? Do you have statistics demonstrating disappointing performance by RYR at LBA?

Please note that I am not "having a go" at you, but if you choose to post a claim like that then you really do need to include some supporting evidence. Perhaps there is such evidence in the public domain and I have just overlooked it. If so, I would appreciate you directing me to the underlying story.

Cheers, SHED.

[mytravela330]

Turin...
As an employee of Menzies and iv also worked for servisair/globeground and also ringway handling, ive got many years of airport experience behind me, so i understand that we need as many aircraft as we can get coming into Manchester, but its the loyal airlines we want, and not an airlines that just want Manchester when it pleases them, i would rather see the likes of Emirates put more flights in then going onto America and Canada......

[wanna_be_there]

I agree that whilst any new routes/airlines/frequencies are very welcome at MAN, I think RYR comming back would be very bad news for MAN.
They will demand lower fees, and then dissapear again if the taxes go up, fees go up, handling agents spats and so on, they will be gone again.
We need committed airlines, not fly by night, here today gone again tomorrow ones.

[Ian Brooks]

It`s the airlines that look after the business traveller that we need as they are the
people support the routes, tourists are the cream on top that fill the flights
albeit with a much lower fare but still very important, quite often these tourists are the business traveller during the week and earning points on their cards which then ends up with taking the whole family away on a couple of weekend breaks a year

Ian B

[wanna_be_there]

It`s the airlines that look after the business traveller that we need as they are the
people support the routes, tourists are the cream on top that fill the flights


And the business traveller is certainly picking MAN more often these days. I think its interesting that in the past people have said MAN is a low yielding airport, yet its really starting to prove people wrong.
As little as a year ago, many said Emirates would not bring the 3 class A380 into MAN, and would wait until a 2 class varient came out.
-Now EK have brought the 3 class A380 to MAN, and EK themselves have said ALL current A380 routes are exceeding expectations in F/C.
-LH have said they saw a sharp rise in business pax travelling MAN-germany,
-SQ have the F cabin into MAN (yes yes its shared with MUC, but despite what people seem to think, MAN pax are booking it)
-US airways still sends their A333 with the larger Business cabin due to the business contracts, and for US they offer more capacity MAN-PHL than they do LHR-PHL

And people seem to think WE need FR, more like THEY need us!

[Ian Brooks]

And people seem to think WE need FR, more like THEY need us!

Spot onhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

Ian B

[TURIN]

mytravela330

The airlines you mention will pull out of MAN at the drop of a hat if the economic circumstances dictate.
Nothing to do with loyalty, just the hard realities of business.

[easyflyer83]

I do tend to agree....... MAN doesn't want FR back particularly after what happened last time.

In terms of passengers, it doesn't matter whether they are business or leisure. Excellent citations re: business and first class capacity out of MAN these days but a good deal of that traffic won't be business related and we should remember that, there are some very affluent areas on MAN's door step after all. To the airport itself though, business travellers probably don't spend as much as many would have us believe. On the forum of another website is a guy spouting about how AF will be deterring it's business travellers by moving to T3 due to lack of ammenities. In actual fact it is probably the charter and leisure passengers who are the ones who spend at the airport. Even in this day and age the airport experience is part of the holiday to many so people will often eat there, buy shed loads of magazines for the 2 hour flight to PMI aswell as buying tax free etc etc

[TSR2]

In actual fact it is probably the charter and leisure passengers who are the ones who spend at the airport.

Spot on from my observations.

[Ian Brooks]

I wasn`t actually talking about what they would spend at the airport but what they spend to fly

I wouldn`t dream of going shopping at the airport unless I had forgotten something or just to buy a magazine or such as I am fed up with carrying one bag let alone a couple of carrier bags full of overpriced goods which I could get on the high street.

I don`t mind who I fly with as long as I am well looked after and not charged a rate that is over the odds
Have flown to France many times with most of the carriers that have operated over the years from MAN. AF/LS/BE/BA BA dumped us at Paris one trip luckily AF picked up the pieces and got us back, LS had an aircraft go tech but after telling everybody they were going to fly to Blackpool managed to find an aircraft from somewhere and as we boarded the aircraft then told we were going direct to Manchester and arrived only about 50 mins late.


Ian B


Ian B

[ACCMan]

Highest spending on-airport pax are charter pax travelling to either Turkey or Egypt.

Dixons sell at a genuine tax free price. Take the high street Currys/PC World price and remove 17.5%. I’ve bought all my iPods from there; better than anything on-line!

[slapdash8]

Hi all

Just heard some possible upcoming terminal changes. Can they be confirmed?

Easyjet from T3 to T2 (with upto 10 aircraft to be based)
bMI from T3 to T1 (to tie with lufthansa/star alliance)
Airfrance from T1 to T3 (for the Flybe codeshare and skyteam)
Delta from T2 to T3 (for skyteam with afklm)
Possible KLM from T2 to T3 (for above reason)

[easyflyer83]

ACC, whilst your point proves my point re: leisure pax spending habits, one caveat is that obviously Turkey and Egypt are non EU and therefore the sales of cigarettes and spirits will increase spend. So I would imagine.

Slapdash8.... interesting rumours. Where have you heard that? Easyjet to T2 would certainly remove any issues re: an increasingly congested T3 ramp. Most, if not all, Easy aircraft will be leaving just as the inbound transatlantics are arriving and it also provides some flow of flights ex T2 during the quieter afternoon/evening times.

Taxi times would be a little bit longer mind.

[MUFC_fan]

So the BE tie-up has meant AF are moving and I would assume that it is only right to think that DL and KL will follow suit. Remember the whole point of the TATL is to share such things (I assume DL use AF check-in etc already at T2?), besides, if I'm not mistaken AF/KL are owned by the same company!

U2 wouldn't surprise me however I would have guessed at T1, mainly for what is mentioned above concerning taxi times etc.

BMI is almost a given.

So T3 would be there for BE, AF, KL, DL, AA, BA, FI and the smaller carriers?

[easyflyer83]

But to be fair taxi times at certain points of T1 are just aslong. Also,increased taxi times for departures from 23L and 04L and arrivals on 23R are minimal IMO.

[BHX5DME]

Sept Pax - 1,932,253 down 1.59%
12m ending 30.09.10 - 17,801,832 down 8.04%

Sept Movements - 15,489 down 4.22%

Freight - 9,337 up 7.35%

[wanna_be_there]

One of the worst kept secrets regarding AA at MAN has just been made official. JFK route ran may-sept on a seasonal basis this year, but next year sees it go year round:

Flight:AA 211 (American Airlines) Depart:Manchester3 Oct 11:10Arrive:New York J F Kennedy International Apt3 Oct 13:55Aircraft:757Stops:Non-StopClick Here for Details (http://javascript<b></b>:flightClick('925330',''))Travel Time:7hrs 45mins

The dates used are October 2011 and the engine is OAG timetable, as the AA booking engine only goes as far as August 2011 for all flights so far.

ORD also remains year round next year with B757, same as this year.

Good news, so I wonder if any new UK stations will be added tomorrow?

[eggc]

A.net forum is suggesting AA will announce ORD-BHX today, and UA will announce ORD-MAN very soon.

[sparkysam]

Flew from ATL overnight on sunday with delta. Passengers were asked to swop to ATL-DUB- MAN or ATL-LHR-MAN with a $200 premium for doing so as the flight was overbooked. The DUB aircraft was parked next door stand A2 and seemed relitivly empty [767]. The LHR flight also did not seem to be well supported this was parked on stand A4[777].
On arrival in MAN 50 mins early due to strong tailwinds we were waiting for 40 mins to get on stand with engines running.
No problems with luggage or immigration well done all at MAN.

Thanks Sparkysam and family:D

[easyJet A321]

This may have been mentioned before but having just been looking at the airports timetable apparently from yesterday 05/10/10 - 06/10/11 there is a twice weekly service with Biman Bangladesh Airlines to Dhaka does this actually operate? I'm confused!

[TURIN]

Well I didn't see it.

Anyone else?

[Ringwayman]

It's one to look out for next year when they get hold of another 777.

[mantug01]

For the spotters who roam, Etihad are operating an A340-600 on Friday

[T3Lifer]

Easyjet from T3 to T2 (with upto 10 aircraft to be based)
bMI from T3 to T1 (to tie with lufthansa/star alliance)
Airfrance from T1 to T3 (for the Flybe codeshare and skyteam)
Delta from T2 to T3 (for skyteam with afklm)
Possible KLM from T2 to T3 (for above reason)

Can confirm AirFrance will be operating out of T3 from the 31st of October

will confirm the rest once it breaks, but it would be only reasonable to assume the moves would be correct to accomodate the Skyteam flights.

[T3Lifer]

from October 31st Air France will be operating from T3, as for the rest no news as yet but it would seem a logical move to accommodate skyteam etc

[Manchester Exile]

...and I will be on it! Thanks for the information, I just assumed it would be a 777.

I'm just off to pack my bags and make my way to SYD for the long journey to MAN.

[easyflyer83]

Re: T3 it would indeed be logical for atleast KL to move to T3. There are obviously synegies involved hence why they first moved to T2 to be with AF. Would it make real sense to move the entire alliance? I'm not sure.

U2 have stated that they would like to remain in T3 but are worried what the impact of AF's move will have on terminal/ramp capacity....particularly as they are expanding the number of based aircraft.

[GavinC]

EY operated an A330 on monday too and with the A340 coming in it would appear that they are mixing it up somewhat. Are they low on a 773?

[Ian Brooks]

I think it is planned as an A330 for just over a month due to aircraft shortage
but I stand to be corrected


Ian B

[All names taken]

On the subject of who spends more at the airport: business pax or leisure?....

As a weekly business pax and a fairly frequent leisure pax too, I would agree with most posters here that it is the leisure pax that spends more. On a business trip, the plan is to arrive as late as possible, either go straight to a lounge if I have a business ticket or I'm on Star A or buy a cup of coffee if not. That's it. Same with most of my friends who have to fly for work.
When I have my leisure hat on I arrive earlier and have a bit of a look around and whilst not being tempted by special offers on some D class celebrity's latest nosegay, I am likely to spend more.

However - whereas leisure pax spend more at the airport, business pax generally spend more on their flights - and that is why the airlines and aircraft are there - yields/profits not numbers of bums on seats. And this is why business pax are important to airports even though they don't spend the cash in the shops.

Also can I bust a myth here: having been lucky enough to spend enough of my own flying experiences in business and first (with a lot of economy too). In my experience, first class seems rarely to have any corporate types in there, also business class itself seems an increasing misnomer as high net worth individuals seem to occupy more of these seats these days. You are far more likely to see suits in economy than in business now. Firms cannot / will not fund the costs all too often.

[All names taken]

AF/BE 'CO-OPERATION'

Not picking on these guys in particular, just that I happen to go to Paris a lot, but can anybody tell me when 'codeshares' and 'co-operation' become cartels?

Manchester Paris is AF and BE - that's it. If these two get together where's the competition? I wonder what will happen to the prices?:hmm:

Also the difference in the flight experience between an AF airbus and a BE Dash is similar to the difference between a bicycle and a car. Call me snobbish but I actually feel quite embarrassed getting off a Dash at a large airport like CDG, it feels like I've just arrived from Sticksville. That's one of the reasons I have generally used AF but now thanks to this tie up there will be less AF to choose from.

[JC25]

5 out of the 7 daily BE/AF flights will operate using a jet so you can rest assured that you will be able to avoid your ridiculous embarrassment at stepping off the highly efficient, perfect for the job, Q400 :rolleyes:

[easyflyer83]

I plan to use AF via CDG next year and I am actually co-ordinating my schedule to try the dash. I certainly won't be embarrassed and I cannot imagine why you ever would be.

[Pizzaro]

Maybe AF will get Concord going fo all names taken, wouldn't want him to be embarrassed.
Ps what's wrong with Sticksville ?

[chubbs]

I agree with All names taken. There is no comparison. I would always choose to fly on a jet operated by a legacy carrier rather than a noisy old prop every time. Its not about being a snob. Its just a more pleasant flying experience.

Quite obviously from some of the replies, some of the crew who work on them can be overly sensitive when a passenger dares to knock their beloved machine. Do get real chaps. Hopefully, one day when you get to fly a real airliner you will realise just how gash the dash was.

[Mr.Bloggs]

Dash 8 is too low for airbridge/jetway connections. Often parked at remote stands, needing buses, crowded and unpleasant things. And pax can get wet and/or cold getting on and off buses and aircraft.

Dunno about being embarassed as a mere passenger though. My colleagues and I flying Sheds about the place felt a bit self-conscious getting in and out of those ugly old birds. The Airbus is a workplace to feel more proud about! When I'm paxing about, can't say I care as long as the a/c and crew are safe enough. The Dash 8 fits that bill, at least with its UK carrier.

[easyflyer83]

Chubbs, I operate on the Airbus.......no wishful thinking on my part. I am also not knocking peoples desire to fly on the jets but more the idiotic notion that people care what a/c you have just flown into CDG on.

As i said I would like to fly on the Dash and intend to do so when I connect to an A380 in Paris. The reason why I am choosing the dash is because i rarely get to fly on turbo props.

And Sticksville, Manchester or wherever the Q400 has ensured that many routes have remained profitable under the recession and also rising oil prices. To me that is more important than vanity.

[All names taken]

hmm

Some of you missing the point about the Dash vs Airbus.....it's about customer choice. I'm a customer therefore it's my personal preference. I've flown on dash 8s dozens of times in the last couple of years nearly always where there's no choice or where the schedule suits me better. For the dash lovers on this forum, try queuing to board one and listen to the disparaging comments from those around you about 'hedgehoppers' and 'old bombers' to learn what pax really think. Anyway as I said, it's my choice, others are entitled to their own opinion.

For easyflyer wanting to try the dash instead of the airbus option, if you do, and again it is your choice, here are a few tips for the journey:
1. Don't expect your normal cabin bag to be accepted, as it's unlikely to fit in the o/h bins on a dash. This might be an expensive surprise at the gate. No probs with this on an airbus.
2. Take an umbrella, you are going to be walking out to your dash and waiting around at the bottom of the stairs whilst people in front of you try to stuff their bags into the undersize o/h bins. No probs there with AF airbus as you will board through an airbridge.
3. Take earplugs if sat near the engines
4. Take something interesting to read as your journey will be a longer one
5. Leave more time for your connection as your dash will be parked in a bussing position at CDG.

But that's really the superficial part of my original post which posed the question: when does codesharing and co-operation between two airlines that have the whole market on a route (any route) become a cartel?

Also another question: how can a full service airline code share with a no frills airline? Would customers not be miffed about paying for a full service airline ticket and ending up with a no frills airline service?

[adfly]

From what I have heard the dash is not much louder than the airbus and also there is pretty much no difference in the duration of the flight between the two-about 5 mins at most as the dash is not a lot slower than a jet on shorter flights and accelerates quicker.

[MUFC_fan]

From what I have heard the dash is not much louder than the airbus and also there is pretty much no difference in the duration of the flight between the two-about 5 mins at most as the dash is not a lot slower than a jet on shorter flights and accelerates quicker.


Is it not more to do with it's ability to move more efficiently(quickly) between flight levels and therefore congested airspace? Hence the reason it is only quicker on shorter flights?

[jubilee]

Interesting article on --- focustaiwan.tw then put Manchester in the search box.
Jubilee

[JC25]

Well I had a very quick look and the fares don't seem to have sky rocketed... it's possible to book a day return in three weeks time for less than £160 all in (via AF site) which is not unreasonable. If the fares do get crazy, then no doubt a third airline will see an opportunity to win some passengers by offering lower fares.

Flybe aren't really a "no-frills" airline - they have rather successfully placed themselves as an inbetween, neither full service nor no-frills, niche airline. They offer lounge access, a frequent flyer program, flexible tickets, interlining/connections and allocated seating etc. The only real difference between AF and BE is that there is no complimentary refreshments on board and there may be a charge for a checked in baggage.

However, it the responsibility of AF to inform passengers booking with them that the flight will be operated by BE and make them aware of the differences. Looking at AF's website it is not specific about meals (says meal info not available) and it says there is a 1 piece/23kg checked bag allowance with no mention of any charges. Of course, it may be that pax booked through AF will be provided with a meal voucher for use on board and a complimentary checked bag... I am sure this will have been considered by those involved in working these things out (at least I would hope so!).

As for the Q400... I agree everyone is entitled to their opinion and I have heard people moan about the Q400, but likewise I have heard many positive comments also...

Granted, it can be a little noisier than a jet depending on where in the cabin you sit and how well the NVS system is working (if not working correctly it is sometimes switched off until it is fixed).

As for the flight time, the difference is pretty insignificant. The block time from MAN to CDG is only 5 or 10 mins longer on the Q400 than the E195 and if a flight leaves on time it will often arrive on stand early at CDG (the schedule includes padding for slots etc.).

And remote stands - I cannot comment on whether this will be the case at T2 at CDG but while BE have been using T1, they do not park remotely and it is a short 20 second walk into the terminal building (except on the odd occasion where the aircraft has been parked at a satellite which is closed for refurb in which case a coach is needed - not the fault of the Q400).

Oh and large bags - those lockers are deceptively large and most trolly bags that aren't packed to bursting point will fit although the narrow opening can make it interesting trying to get the wheels in! But if they don't fit in the locker they will fit under the seat in front - and if they don't fit there, then they should never have made it into the cabin in the first place. Unfortunately, many passengers don't think that the cabin size requirements apply to them and their beloved bag and then complain when they get on board can't find a home for their bag :ugh:

Oh and by the way, I am not a Q400 pilot :=

[roverman]

Also posted on LPL thread.


Big jump in Liverpool Airport loss : Liverpool Airport News Stories (http://www.uk-airport-news.info/liverpool-airport-news-071010.html)

Manchester Airport makes £34m from car parking : Manchester Airport News Stories (http://www.uk-airport-news.info/manchester-airport-news-071010.html)

[Egerton Flyer]

Hi Jubilee,
Great news for MAN.:O
Reading on the web, it could be China Airlines or Eva on both passenger and cargo flights.

E.F.

[Ian Brooks]

As I understand it, it will be both on cargo and China Airlines on pax with a possibility of EVA
Nice to see more MD-11s, this will really give the cargo figures a boost
Now we are in good news mode how about a bit more, i`m sure it`s cominghttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

Ian B

[Egerton Flyer]

At this rate, we'll need a third runway :confused: :E

E.F.

[Ian Brooks]

Trying to get my head round all the possible terminal changes at present
At first it was mooted to be T3 for LCC now it looks mainly One World
and Sky Team Alliance, talk of Easy going to T2 which if they are going to continue expanding they will half fill T3 on their own.


Ian

[roverman]

My posting of the links to articles on the contrasting financial reports from LPL and MAN was not intended as a pro-MAN gloat, but rather to support my assertion that the low-cost model is not sustainable, and that MAN has been wise to not court locos at the expense of legacy business. These figures are more than a snapshot, as was suggested in a response on the LPL thread. MAN has remained consistently profitable throughout recent years of traffic decline, just as LPL has generally been unprofitable throughout its years of rapid growth. LPL relies primarily on the patronage of two locos, whereas MAN has a broad spread of traffic across several sectors, and despite recent difficulties has retained many of its long-standing legacy customers. Peel, being substantially a real-estate business, may have stood the losses because the airport traffic levered land values across their portfolio. With VAS now being the majority shareholder, they will surely be looking for profits from the airport(s). LPL has no record of profitability despite huge % growth to a creditable 5mppa. Given the relatively small airport site at LPL there doesn't seem to be any indication that more traffic growth will bring the operation into profit via better utilisation. More likely that prices will have to rise. Since the only incentive for an airline serving the NW of England to use LPL over MAN is price, the next few years could be interesting. MAN has funds from its substantial profits to invest in upgrading and new capacity. LPLs growth has generated virtually no 'new' traffic, simply diverted it from MAN, and in the process has undermined MAN's ability to act as a major gateway for Northern England, with a critical mass to support a greater range of destinations. The signs are increasingly there across the UK that the 'every airport will grow' madness of the 2003 White Paper is proved unfounded, and that we have to look back to the 1978 version, which stressed MAN's role, as a credible blueprint.

[easyflyer83]

Whilst i agree that your post is not "pro MAN", MAN has several low cost carriers amongst it's customers who, to my knowledge, pay their way. With this in mind, how can you categorically say that LPL is not making money because it's customer base is predominantly LCC without any actual proof? Could it not just be that MAN has a better strategy (in general) or a better, more efficient way of operating?

Considering that much of an airports revenue stream is from non-aeronautical activity I'm not sure whether your claim is valid.

[Ian Brooks]

I think what Roverman is trying to say MAN does not do deals in the same way as LPL, i`m sure they do them!
Ryanair steamroller their way in and then keep threatning to pull out if the airport doesn`t play ball on rates, Easyjet/Baby/Jet2 are a little more civalised in the way they do business.
It is well known that MAN stood upto Ryanair and told them where to go if they didn`t like the rates, this caused Ryanair to get up and walk even partly dumping one of their most profitable routes.
Easyjet are supposed to have an agreement with LPL but if this is correct and they have agreed not to expand MAN faster than LPL, the time seems to have come when that may change as MAN are more than matching LPLs expansion and if the
rumours of more expansion next year up to 10 aircaft by 2012 are correct


Ian B

[bjones4]

What are those ~10/15 check-in desks (400 upwards) for that are located in 'The Station' up from the bus stands?

Walked past them so many times and never thought to ask...

[aidoair]

What are those ~10/15 check-in desks (400 upwards) for that are located in 'The Station' up from the bus stands?

Walked past them so many times and never thought to ask...


Not sure if they're used anymore and are for extra capacity.

I know this is where XL airways check-in was located.

There is also a similar downstairs / out of the way check-in area in the T2 arrivals area. Does anyone know which airlines now use these ones please?

[AndyH52]

support my assertion that the low-cost model is not sustainable, and that MAN has been wise to not court locos at the expense of legacy business

I'm sorry Roverman but (not for the first time) I don't quite follow your logic. Manchester has actively courted lo-cos for some time (Easyjet and Ryanair being prime examples) and this has generally been at the expense of its existing 'legacy' operators.


LPLs growth has generated virtually no 'new' traffic, simply diverted it from MAN, and in the process has undermined MAN's ability to act as a major gateway for Northern England, with a critical mass to support a greater range of destinations


Easyjet, Ryanair, Jet 2 and Wizzair amongst others have successfully helped grow the market from the north west (and elsewhere) and generated a great deal of new traffic. Your regular assertions that the growth of lo-cos (funny how jet 2 at Leeds never seem to attract your fire as a distract from Manchester) has undermined MAN's ability to be a major gateway is to my mind flawed. MAN has a virtual monopoly from the north west on long / medium haul schedules, domestics and IT traffic and around a 60% share of short haul european traffic. It makes a significant profit every year as you rightly point out. It boasts of serving more destinations than any airport in the UK. I think you already are a major gateway - all that the growth of Liverpool, Leeds and Blackpool has done is make sure people have a choice unlike in 1978, when Manchester enjoyed an even greater monopoly.

[750XL]

There is also a similar downstairs / out of the way check-in area in the T2 arrivals area. Does anyone know which airlines now use these ones please?

Mostly the odd charters in the peak of summer when it's really busy. Sky, Onur Air etc...

Also seen them used by Emirates during the T1 bomb scare and by various airlines during football matches etc

Chav City Direct, I mean Travel City Direct used to use the station check in desks, always seemed an odd location to me.

[TSR2]

Manchester has actively courted lo-cos for some time (Easyjet and Ryanair being prime examples) and this has generally been at the expense of its existing 'legacy' operators.

I don't quite agree with this statement.

About 10 years ago when lo-co was very much in its infancy, I attended a meeting at Manchester Airport addressed by the then MD Mr John Spooner. He very clearly explained the airport strategy at that time which was to encourage lo-cost airlines to operate from East Midlands whilst Manchester would concentrate on 'legacy' scheduled services and charter. At the time charter services accounted for 60%+ of passenger numbers. Also, the only lo-cost operator was Monarch Scheduled who at that time were a FULL SERVICE airline.

In the following years, the success of the lo-cost airlines at Liverpool, Leeds and to a lesser extent Blackpool, had a dramatic impact at Manchester in two ways. Firstly it hit the charter market extremely badly to the extent that charter today represents just over 30% of annual passengers. Secondly, the popularity of short city breaks hit the 'legacy' hard with many business passengers moving from the legacy carriers to the cheaper lo-cost carriers.

So the move by Manchester Airport in recent years towards more lo-cost services is in my opinion more a reaction to the reduction in charter services than anything else.

[roverman]

easyflyer and Andy H52,

Thanks for your comments. It is not always posible to set out all the arguments in detail within a short post such as my previous, and I accept therefore that some of the logic may be hard to follow. I was drawing attention to the fact that LPL's traffic (mainly loco) is not generating profits even at 5mppa, and therefore there is a question mark over how sustainable this is. Airport infrastructure has to be financed from somewhere and if there is continuously no profit, how will this be done?

You are right - I didn't mention Leeds. I haven't looked at their profit and loss figures but the arguments are broadly the same, except that you can argue that LBA serves NE England rather than just fragmenting the NW market as MAN/LPL competition does.

Yes, MAN has recognised the importance of locos, but has been careful and measured in its approach so as not to become reliant on this volatile sector in the way that LPL, LBA, and STN have.

I suppose the main tenet of my argument is to question the value (to society and to the economy of the NW) of the loco business at LPL, as it simply fragments services over a small geographic area. It has mainly duplicated or replaced services at MAN using a business model which generates no profit for the airport. Profits at MAN can be re-cycled into improved infrastructure as well as contributing to local taxation. For example, MAN is able to make a substantial funding contribution to the Metrolink tram system extension, without which it probably wouldn't happen. This has benefits far beyond the airport's business.

The smaller regional airports like LPL have a role in serving niche markets, but it is wasteful to have them compete with the main regional gateway. The most enlightened approach to this would be to spread the public ownership of MAN beyond just the Greater Manchester authorities, and to include the other authorities of NW England. This would give true ownership of the regional gateway to all the cities and counties, a broader base for funding, broader dividend contributions, and help to foster a coordinated rather than competitive approach to transport and infrastructure planning. An example is Munich, owned by the City of Munich, the State of Bavaria, and the Federal Goverment as equity sharing partners. Not likely in the present political climate, I know.

[learjet50]

Pardon me but am I Missing something here.

Why would we want to know who was admitted at Wythenshawe Hospital ??

Did you get the Doctors diagnose as to the nature of her illness??

Perhaps we could post it here.

Would any body like to know which Emergency Ambulances where available to Wythenshawe Hospital.


Again I must be missing some point about this totally in appropriate thread.

Could anybody please help



Thanks

[Manchester Exile]

I flew in on the Etihad on 8th October - a long journey from Sydney, and an excellent flight and service from Etihad, as always. However, upon arrival at MAN we had to wait 49 minutes to get to our stand. After spending 29 hours on my journey, it was not a welcome development.

The Etihad flight had a large number of Australians on board who were visiting the UK and had decided to avoid LHR. This is fantastic news; however, there was great anger at the long wait for a stand and there was a lot of talk about never flying into Manchester again. This is a very great shame.

I have flown well in excess of 1 million miles in the last few years, to destinations all around the globe. I have only ever had to wait a long period for a stand at Manchester - and not just on this occasion. It reflects very poorly on the airport. If other airports can accomodate traffic upon arrival, why can't MAN?

Then, of course, the travellators in Pier C were not working.

I am proud to come from the North West of England, and I used to be proud of my local airport. But now, it hurts me to say, that pride has turned to embarrassment.

I will write a letter to MAPLC to give my feedback. But it seems such a shame that the airport works so hard to encourage passengers to fly into MAN when visiting the UK, then undoes all the hard work by providing a poor passenger experience.

I know this topic has been raised multiple times on PPRUNE, and I'm not looking to be controversial or cause offence. It just hurts me to see my local airport offer such a low standard of service when compared to other global destinations.

[wanna_be_there]

Manchester exile

I think there may have been an issue with delays that day as the DL and VS in T2 also had to wait for a stand (DL for about 30mins and VS about 25 mins).
It isnt normal to wait that long.
With regards to your flight, dont forget you were on an A340-600, and as its a larger aircraft, it needs a larger stand. If an outbound was delayed leaving, then it meant the EY couldnt get on.

Its not just a MAN problem though, I have arrived through LHR 4 times this year, and waited 25, 34, 42 and 15 minutes for a stand, but maybe I am just unlucky, unless you count the 20 minute wait at JFK and the 10 minute wait at ORD too?

So yes, its frustrating to wait for a stand, but please remember, it might not be an issue that MAN is to blame for.

As for the travelators, yes the lasck travelators is frustrating, but after a '29 hour flight' Id rather walk and stretch my legs anyway to be honest. In terms of poor level of service, but God forbid if people have to use their legs!

[mickyman]

Manchester Exile

Sorry to hear of your woes but was your flight early and therefore
you had to wait for a position?

roverman

Are you not in danger of becomming MANchester-centric with your
perceived argument?
If I substituted LHR and Long-haul into your equation would you be
so keen?

MM

[wanna_be_there]

Sorry to hear of your woes but was your flight early and therefore
you had to wait for a position?

Come to think of it, this flight arrived at 06:33, as I looked at an arrival log that day. The schedule time of arrival is 07:10, so that accounts for 37 minutes of the wait, and then add on 5 mins of taxi time (as the EY had to wait between 05L/R, then there is your 42 minutes.

So, to summerise, not a MAN issue whatsoever!

[iamaviator]

Is 49 minutes really that noticeable during a 29hour journey? I think you were very unlucky, but I really don't believe MAG is to blame for your delay. Your flight arrived over 30 minutes earlier than it should have.

[AndyH52]

I suppose the main tenet of my argument is to question the value (to society and to the economy of the NW) of the loco business at LPL, as it simply fragments services over a small geographic area.


The jobs supported directly and indirectly by the airport and the companies based there have a tremendous value to society and the economy of the Liverpool City Region and beyond. Your view that services should be concentrated at Manchester would benefit only Manchester even with your idea of wider ownership - the levels of GVA generated for Liverpool for the two options just don't compare.


The smaller regional airports like LPL have a role in serving niche markets, but it is wasteful to have them compete with the main regional gateway.


And that is exactly what LPL is doing. It found its niche in the lo cost market which, true as yet has not led to a profit. However the financial picture is much more complex, and as Manchester's own results demonstrate revenues associated with actual aviation activity are only a part of the whole picture. MAN has the benefit of a much more developed property portfolio and non-aviation revenue and it is only in the last couple of years that Peel (and now Vancouver Airport Services) have started to address that issue at LPL.

[wanna_be_there]

Great, ANOTHER LPL vs MAN arguement. Please please please can we stop clogging up the various threads with this boring non-arguement.

MAN has its traffic, LPL has its traffic. Some people prefer to use MAN for whatever reason, and some people prefer to use LPL for whatever reason.

End of.......

[Hamburg 2K8]

Haven't heard anything about the airbridge that broke on Stand 12 a few weeks back? Is this working now? What was/is the problem, there brand fire new, how can this happen? What was Emirates reaction to this?

Also, a A380 question, due to some tight turns on some of MAN's taxiways, does the A380 have to vacate the runway at certain points? Is the landing gear problem that bad that it will brake all the time? I have seen it land both at the airport and when watching a video on you tube and all those landings (about 6 or 7 I think I've seen) the A/C has vacated from 23R on AG. I thought AF would of been the turning off point, I take it AF1 is to tight for a A/C that size? I remember seeing Biman DC-10's a few years ago get off at AF1 and slow down very quickly when landing on 23R, but then again suppose they weren't exactley full of passengers were they?!

[GavinC]

Manchester confidential.

Airport generates £100m dividend

Greater Manchester councils share £20m: airport keeps £80m

£100m dividend in 2010. The whopping payout – which is more than double the amount of last year - is revealed in the firm’s latest set of accounts, covering the year to March 31, 2010.

The dividend increased from £47.3m in 2009 despite turnover and profits remaining largely the same in 2010. The firm recorded a turnover of £282m (2009: £286m) and pre-tax profits of £46m, the same as the previous year.

Of that £100m, its parent company, Manchester Airport Group Plc, will get £20m, shared between the 10 Greater Manchester Councils that own it. Manchester City Council has a 55 per cent share, which equates to £11m. The other nine borough councils will get £1m each. [/B]

The airport itself will keep £80m to reinvest in the business.

In the notes to the accounts, the directors said the group was ‘well placed’ to manage the business successfully through a number of long-term contracts and ‘considerable financial resources.’ The group is due to renegotiate its banking facilities in July 2011, and the directors said that nothing had been drawn to their attention ‘to suggest a renewal would not be forthcoming on acceptable terms.’

The turnover is broken down into aviation (£131m); retail concessions (£59m); car parking (£34m); property (£29m) and ‘other’ (£28m).

The airport employed 2,040 staff (2009: 2,145), which carried a wage bill of £50.5m (2009: £52.8m). The airport owes £195m to creditors before March 31, 2011 and £181m after that period. I is owed £152m by debtors.

The company finished the year with net assets of £808m, down slightly from £899m the previous year.

The accounts also mention a contingent liability ‘in the respect of claims that have been made to the lands tribunal...from individual property owners in respect of alleged loss of property value arising from the development and use of new and extended airport runways.’

This refers to an on-going battle between the airport and more than 330 home-owners in Knutsford and Mobberley, who are being represented by law firm Hugh James. The claimants argued their house prices had been affected by the construction of runway 2. The airport reached a settlement in July.

The three regional airports owned or controlled by Manchester Airports Group also filed accounts today. East Midlands Airport and Bournemouth International Airport both recorded profit in 2010, but Humberside Airport lost money.

Here are the financial highlights:

Bournemouth International Airport Ltd
Turnover £15.7m (2009: £16.1m)
£4.8m – aviation
£2m – car parking
£2.5m – retail
£6.3m – property

Pre-tax profit £3m (2009: £1.8m)
Net assets £62m (2009: £60.8m)
Staff 116 (2009: 118)
Wage bill £4.6m (2009: £4.7m)

East Midlands International Airport Ltd
Turnover £49.5m (2009: £58.2m)
£23.8m – aviation
£9.2m – car parking
£5.1m – retail
£9m – property
£2.1m - other

Pre-tax profit £6m (2009: £9.2m)
Net assets £221.7m (2009: £213m)
Staff 253 (2009: 272)
Wage bill £11.4m (2009: £11.5m)
Highest paid director £307,000

Humberside International Airport Ltd
Turnover £8.3m (2009: £12.7m)
£2.7m – aviation
£1m – car parking
£927,000 – retail
£380,000 – property
£3.2 - other

Pre-tax loss £1.8m (2009: £1m)
Net liabilities £5.7m (2009: £3m)
Net debt £20m
Staff 142 (2009: 149)
Wage bill £3.9m (2009: £4.2m)

[AUTOGLIDE]

Sorry to hear of your woes but was your flight early and therefore
you had to wait for a position?

Come to think of it, this flight arrived at 06:33, as I looked at an arrival log that day. The schedule time of arrival is 07:10, so that accounts for 37 minutes of the wait, and then add on 5 mins of taxi time (as the EY had to wait between 05L/R, then there is your 42 minutes.

So, to summerise, not a MAN issue whatsoever!

I don't know, 'Wanna be There' if you work at MAN, but this is the attitude that drives me to despair of MAN. Typical MAN take or shove it response. No idea at all of customer service. Perhaps, from the airline and pax perspective, it didn't seem that big an issue to arrive half an hour early, it's not unusual after all. Perhaps they thought the airport actually might be able to accomodate them, it does after all like to tell everyone how great it is without actually delivering it. 40 odd minutes is unnaceptable, end of. But as you say, the flight arrived a bit early so it's not MAN's fault, it's the airline...how rude of them.

[crewmeal]

Sorry to hear of your woes but was your flight early and therefore
you had to wait for a position?

Come to think of it, this flight arrived at 06:33, as I looked at an arrival log that day. The schedule time of arrival is 07:10, so that accounts for 37 minutes of the wait, and then add on 5 mins of taxi time (as the EY had to wait between 05L/R, then there is your 42 minutes.

So, to summerise, not a MAN issue whatsoever!

So what you're saying is don't bother to arrive early or you won't get a stand. A bit like a pensioner waiting for the Post Office to open I guess. If a 12 - 13 hour flight makes up time for what ever reason then it looses it again waiting 'to be served' I guess.

[Curious Pax]

I don't know for sure in this case, but often airlines are reluctant to change stands at the last minute, even if offered alternatives by the airport. As a result if the preferred stand is occupied they can still end up holding for a while despite being surrounded by other possibilities.

Stands are at a premium around 7am when the nightstoppers are leaving and the longhauls are piling in, so the airport don't have the luxury of keeping a stand free for the hour before a flight is due in just in case it shows up early. A downside of that of course is that a delay to the previous flight can easily have an impact to the next one.

Not poor customer service, just commercial reality I would have thought.

[wanna_be_there]

I don't know, 'Wanna be There' if you work at MAN,

No, I dont work at MAN.....

but this is the attitude that drives me to despair of MAN. Typical MAN take or shove it response.

Not different to any airport arounf the world. As I mentioned earlier, I cant count the number of times I have had to wait for a stand at the likes of LHR/JFK/ORD etc, so why is it just typical of MAN.

No idea at all of customer service. Perhaps, from the airline and pax perspective, it didn't seem that big an issue to arrive half an hour early, it's not unusual after all. Perhaps they thought the airport actually might be able to accomodate them,

Like Ive said, the EY on the 8th was an A340-600, only a couple of stands at T1 are capable of holding it, so, if an aircraft was on stand, what exactly are MAN supposed to do about it? Tell the other airline to bugger off as theyve had their time, even if there are still pax boarding?, oh no, that brings it back to: No idea at all of customer service, and typical MAN take it or shove it response. You cant have it both ways!

40 odd minutes is unnaceptable, end of.

So, if a coach service runs say, from MAN-LON, and is 40 minutes early getting to just outside London, and then had to wait in traffic for 40 mins. The traffic then dissapated and you arrived at your stop bang on time, you would find that unnaceptable? After all, thats the basic story of whta happened to the EY flight.

But as you say, the flight arrived a bit early so it's not MAN's fault, it's the airline...

Bingo, so as you have admitted it yourelf, why argue the point and say it IS MAN's fault?!?!?! :ugh:

[ian_h1]

As they say Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

Yes, You ARE missing something - the post which was above mine which was querying why an EZY had come in on Sat afternoon before the EK departed and had declared a medical emergency.

Oh and no I didnt enquire of the doctor as to her condition, I was more concerned with my own elderly mothers collapse......:mad:

[Manchester Exile]

Yes, the Etihad flight I was on was early. But my point is that I have never had to wait for more than 10 minutes to get to a stand at any other world airport, only Manchester. And it has happened on several occasions.

Maybe I'm just lucky when I fly into other airports, but I certainly feel that luck evens itself out over a long period, so it's odd that I have only ever experienced lengthy delays at Manchester.

As I said in my original post, I have over 1 million miles under my belt so I don't believe I'm just picking on a single occurence of an issue and drawing an unfair conclusion.

I'm not here to bash MAN, just make an observation based upon a lot of experience. And certainly there was much anger amongst my fellow passengers, many of whom vowed never to fly into Ringway again - which was the main point of my post. We can all shrug our shoulders and say that it's reasonable to wait 49 minutes for a stand, but the customers on the flight didn't think so and will take their business elsewhere in the future. Which really, truly, breaks my heart. I love my city and my airport.

[easyflyer83]

Like many things in this industry, what people vow and what people actually do are often two completely different things.

I fly into MAN a hell of a lot and I have never had to wait for a stand at all. I think the justification made by other posters here is reasonable. That being an early arrival, different aircraft type and the morning peak. I would be interested to hear what the crews explanation was. I think you would find that if they explained that it was a particularly busy time at MAN, that you were early and using a larger than usual aircraft and the complications those things can bring, most pax would have perhaps appreciated the situation. Quite often it's the crews communication that is at fault in these situations.

I would never deny there is room for improvement (there always is as the cliche goes) but I detest some of the posts here that depict MAN as a poorly run third world type airport. The fact that it is consistently voted the best or one of the best UK airports by the travel trade and passengers alike and manages to make a profit goes, on the whole, unoticed.

[pwalhx]

I agree with easyflyer, I fly in and out of Manchester regularly and can't remember the last time I had to wait on an aircraft for a stand to become free. However I can think of at least 4 occasions in the last 6 months where it has happened to me at Heathrow.

It seems that several things that are common around the world are quoted here as problems. I am currently in Lisbon having had probably had the longest walk from a stand to baggage reclaim, (with one very short travelator that probably went 10 - 15 metres). If that had been Manchester I am sure many on here would have been quoting this as another example of a problem, when in fact it is just a fact of life travelling to airports around the world.

[mickyman]

Manchester Exile

You do seem to be 'a bit of a drama queen' if I may say?

MM

[EC-ILS]

When EYs early DUB flight lands its not uncommon for it to wait 30mins or so for a stand. Landed in FRA once and had to wait 50 mins for a stand.

[wanna_be_there]

And certainly there was much anger amongst my fellow passengers, many of whom vowed never to fly into Ringway again - which was the main point of my post. We can all shrug our shoulders and say that it's reasonable to wait 49 minutes

Right, I think you are missing a huge point here. You arrived 37 minutes early, and got onto stand 10 mins late. So, 10 mins is not that long of a delay, and any flight arriving 10 minutes either side of the scheduled arrival time is 'on time' in my opinion. Therefore, passengers were angry that they arrived at gate 'on time'?
Is there any other form of transport in the world where pax get pi**ed off at arriving on time?
I agree with easy flyer that a severe lack of communication from the flight deck is to blame for the 'anger' here.
Put it this way, which sounds better:

'we have to wait 47 minutes as there is no stand'
'we have arrived 37 minutes early and there is currently an aircraft on our allocated stand, so unfortunatly we will have to wait until the other flight departs'

Both statements are true, but one is worded much better.
As far as I remember, only stands 12 and 31 at T1 can handle the A340-600 due to the size, so, when an aircraft is parked on either stand, there is nothing that can be done about that, especially if you land 37 minutes ahead of your allocated time. Like has been said before, MAN cant leave stands available for a particular flight an hour before it arrives, especially where at a time where there is a high volumes of nightstopping aircraft and arrivals.

I think this whole thing has been completely blown out of proprortion and the people on this flight completely over-reacted.

[Suzeman]

As has been noted before, the Airport may well have offered an alternative stand but the airline then chose not to go with it. Will be lots of reasons - don't want their passengers bussed if on a remote stand and if on a remote stand there would likely be no time to re-position the aircraft on to the terminal with a relatively quick turnaround, tugging from remote costs etc etc.

One wonders what happened on this occasion - what did the crew say to the pax? In any case, from the pax point of view the Airport gets the blame as usual when something goes wrong, even when the problem may be not be within MAplc's sphere of responsibility.

Will be interesting to see what feedback you get from the Airport

Suzeman

[purplehelmet]

what sort of image must this send out to potential new airlines considering using manchester in the future? For an airport of its size and supposed future expansion plans it seems a bit lame to say sorry you're a bit early you're going to have to wait.

surely a bit of foward planning would avoid situations like this cropping up.
Also think about how much fuel is being wasted whilst these aircraft are sat waiting around for so long,im sure if it was a certain irish fellow's aircraft waiting for that long he would be putting a claim in for wasted fuel,down time of his aircraft,and crew wages.

[wanna_be_there]

seems a bit lame to say sorry you're a bit early you're going to have to wait.

OMFGthis is getting silly now!
The EY 15 on 8th October was an A340-600. It needed one of the 2 stands for an A340-600, but unforunatly an aircraft was on that stand, so yes, it had to wait!
It actually arrived at stand near as damn on time so what the hell is the issue!
If you arrived at a shop at 08:30, and it didnt open until 09:00, would you expect it to open at 08:30 for you?

I really really really really do not see what the issue is here?!?!?!?!?!

[DCS99]

Long waits after touchdown for stands are amongst my pet peeves - and if you talk to Flight Deck crew, they agree.

Because the point of air travel is to get there quickly.
Call me biased but Zurich Airport, Singapore Airport and others recognise that.
You don't have to wait for a stand if you land early there.

For me, it's not acceptable to have a "jobsworths" attitude and say "it's your own fault for landing early".

If you want to keep passengers happy, then look after them well.:ok:

It's not proven, but it's likely there was another aircraft on the planned Etihad stand, but I doubt it was a A340-600.

So...perhaps the real questions are

1. Why was that other aircraft on stand? and/or
2. Perhaps there should be more than 2 stands capable of handling the A340-600?

Or maybe I've been spoilt by too many trips to the world's more efficient airports like HKG, SIN and ZRH...and before you think I'm a Scouser ;), I'm born and bred in Stretford. NFT.

[purplehelmet]

sorry mate im trying to look at this from the veiw point of a foreign passenger just arriving off a long haul and being told there's no gate just yet. after all we are talking about a major international airport,not a corner shop.
as a matter of interest does anyone know what aircraft were using the two gates in question?

[easyflyer83]

DCS99 you mention ZRH. U2's MAN-ZRH almost always uses airbridge equipment in ZRH. Last Tuesday we were placed on remote which included a 15/20 minute taxi. The reason for this is that there were no airbridge/terminal stands available and this was down to us "being out of sequence" due to the fact that we were almost 2 hours behind schedule. So with your reasoning do you care to elaborate?

Purplehelmet.... the odd delay is really not going to put anyone off. Passengers or potential airlines. The problem experienced by EY on Friday was an isolated occurance. Even if this happens 2 or 3 times a week (on an airport wide basis) it really isn't a huge problem. By contrast this happens on a much regular basis at other major airports........ LHR for example yet airlines are falling over themselves to fly into there.

This reminds me of the old "oh Emirates won't stand for that" comments. EK, EY and the rest all fly into some dog rough places and in comparison, MAN is a first class facility.

Just to play devils advocate, why not blame EY for sending the much larger A340-600? Because it is a ludricrous suggestion in the same vein that suggesting MAN has serious problems because an aircraft had to wait for a stand.

[Bagso]

Why bother having slots....?

If SIA turns up an hour late, AA an hour early, Delta an hour early, Virgin 45 mins late etc etc and they all hit happen to the apron at the same time what happens then...?

...anyway went to my local Spar Sat morning for some milk, outrageous, had to wait 20 mins for them to open I'm now seeking counselling, rest assured I shall be writing to my MP !

[wanna_be_there]

For me, it's not acceptable to have a "jobsworths" attitude and say "it's your own fault for landing early".

Right, the EY landed early, the stand required was taken so it had to wait. Do you really think if there was another stand available airport control would sit there, clog up a taxiway and laugh at all the inconvinience they are causing?

Why was that other aircraft on stand?

erm, because other airlines are allowed to use stands at MAN too???? Or is MAN only allowed to be used by etihad from now on?
The EY flight arrived early, the other flight was still boarding. So, do you suppose the other flight leave early to accomodate the EY flight? Would you then like to be one of those pax left behind with the excuse 'oh well, another flight arrived early so we had to get our flight out of here' Get real.

Or maybe I've been spoilt by too many trips to the world's more efficient airports like HKG, SIN and ZRH...and before you think I'm a Scouser http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wink2.gif, I'm born and bred in Stretford. NFT.

erm, we are talking about an isolated incident so who is to say MAN isnt efficient, or did I miss every single other flight having to wait for a stand every other single day. I forgot the emirates had to wait 10 hours for a stand last month :rolleyes:

[Trash_Hauler]

DCS99

1. Why was that other aircraft on stand?

The EY was a half hour early. Perhaps whatever was occupying the stand wasnt yet due off... Off schedule works BOTH ways!

2. Perhaps there should be more than 2 stands capable of handling the A340-600?

Remind me again how often we get A340-600 service? The aircraft fits onto the same stand as the 777-300. We get a total of what? Three of them a day (scheduled)... Why build infrastructure where there clearly is not a need? The airport has 2 stands on T1 and all of T2 AND most of remote capable of accommodating that aircraft type. Perhaps EY should move to T2 or accept a remote stand... otherwise they wait!

[rapidman47]

Or maybe I've been spoilt by too many trips to the world's more efficient airports like HKG, SIN and ZRH...and before you think I'm a Scouser , I'm born and bred in Stretford. NFT.
wanna be there why bring Liverpool into your stupid debate you seem paranoid.
Is Liverpool becoming to successful for you.
On the subject of the debate Manchester b4 the a380 was saying it could handle any aircraft at ANY TIME this is clearly not the case and i rest my case:E

[Ian Brooks]

Rapidman
It can it`s just that Etihad demand a certain stand, if the flight is early or late
it can either go on another stand or wait till it is available. This is because the ground
people will have everything set up for them ready

Ian

[DCS99]

easyflyer83

DCS99 you mention ZRH. U2's MAN-ZRH almost always uses airbridge equipment in ZRH. Last Tuesday we were placed on remote which included a 15/20 minute taxi. The reason for this is that there were no airbridge/terminal stands available and this was down to us "being out of sequence" due to the fact that we were almost 2 hours behind schedule. So with your reasoning do you care to elaborate?


The UK is non-Schengen.
The Swiss have knocked down the B-Pier and are rebuilding it at which point they'll jig everything around.

Demolition work on Dock B (http://www.zurich-airport.com/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-656/)

Click the "Movie 2010" on LHS - wait till ca.4.30 for the New Dock B info
Movie Zurich 2010 (http://www.zurich-airport.com/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-646/)

Enjoy!

[wanna_be_there]

wanna be there why bring Liverpool into your stupid debate you seem paranoid.

Rapidman, I was quoting another poster if you cared to look further into the thread. The only person bringing LPL into this is you, so maybe you are paranoid about LPL being in another debate?

Is Liverpool becoming to successful for you.

Without starting another debate, the day LPL handles a daily A380, multiple Tatl flights and so on, then I will worry. Until that happens, or hell freezes over, Ill sleep easy thanks :)

[easyflyer83]

DCS99 so whats the difference? In the MAN example last Friday and my own experience in ZRH last Tuesday, both sets of passengers were inconvenienced yet you "blast" MAN but justify ZRH.

[purplehelmet]

[quote=easyflyer83;
Purplehelmet.... the odd delay is really not going to put anyone off. Passengers or potential airlines.


with respect..


Quote Manchester exile..
"And certaintly there was much anger amonst my fellow passengers,many of whom vowed never to fly to ringway again".

[wanna_be_there]

Purplehelmet,

what people say they will do when annoyed is completely different from what they do in reality.
I couldnt even count The amount of people I have heard stating 'I will never fly with XXX again', but then you see them a couple of weeks/months later.

If the price or schedule is right, they will fly such a route again. Your telling me if a flight AUH-LHR is say £1000, then AUH-MAN is £600, people will pay the extra £400 due the fact they had, in essence, a 10 minute delay at MAN, I think not :=

[easyflyer83]

Purplehelmet...... that is what i meant when i said "what people vow and what people actually do are often two completely different things". People often vow never to fly with a particular airline but hey presto they usually do.

Consequently, out of those passengers who visit the UK on a regular/semi regular basis who "vowed never to fly into ringway again" the chances are most of them will. I know it wouldn't put me off flying into a certain airport. I absolutely hate passing through immigration in JFK, it's an absolute nightmare and takes an absolute age but next year I will travel there for the "umpteenth" time. It really doesn't bother me.

[purplehelmet]

I take your points guy's i really do.
However i feel that the average punter who has no interest in how an airport operates will just see this as a major inconvenience after a 20 odd hour flight.
People tend to remember the bad pionts rather than the good,first impressions and all that!.

thanks..
i'll leave it at that...:ok:

[wanna_be_there]

The basis is, in reality there wasnt actually a delay, but I think somewhere along the line, a lack of communication is to blame for the pax being angry (which is usually how things can escalate).
Yes in an ideal world it would be great to land 37 minutes early, get straight to gate and get out of there, but in an economic reality that won't always happen.
Co-incidently, the EY 15 arrived at 06:56 yesterday and went straight to stand, nearly 15 minutes early, I dont see much praise about that. If something goes wrong, then people have something to say, if something goes right, then hardly any credit is given, its part of the way we live nowdays I suppose.

You win some, you loose some.

Regarding this debate, Unless there is another silly comment about how useless MAN is, thats all I will say on the matter.

I apologise to any readers who have been bored by this, but I refuse to let my local airport get a slagging off when
a) they wernt really to blame for the scenario.
b) it was a non event, the plane arrived at gate near enough on time, so no pax lost any time. I just think its been blown waay out of proportion.

[Manchester Exile]

Goodness me, I said in my original post that I didn't want to cause controversy or bash MAN, and look what happens...

I go back to my original point. The perception amongst the passengers about the efficiencies of Manchester Airport. And that perception, fair or unfair, was negative.

I say again - as somebody who has done literally thousands of hours of long-haul travel, it is only at Ringway that I have had to wait more than 10 minutes or so for a stand. And it has happened on several occasions. The argument about arriving 30 minutes early is meaningless when other airports around the globe accommodate early arrivals efficiently and without fuss - at least when I have flown into them.

And somebody made a comment a few days ago about the travellators being out of service in Pier C, saying that after a ultra-long haul flight this would be of benefit to the passengers, as they would have a chance to stretch their legs. If so, why bother with travellators? If you have them, make sure they work so that passengers are able to make a choice. The broken travellators didn't bother me personally, but again it is all about setting an impression with your fare-paying customers.

To address a couple of other points - I don't know what other aircraft was parked on our stand. I couldn't see from where we were parked. And the flight crew simply told us that "There is another aircraft parked on our stand, and we have to wait for it to be pushed back before we can park."

The early arrival of EY015 should not have taken anyone by surprise as we were told at Abu Dhabi, whilst still parked on the gate, that we would be arriving around 25 minutes early. I don't know who decides on stand allocation, but the delay could not have been because nobody expected the flight to arrive early.

No offence intended by my posts.

[wanna_be_there]

On to another topic, the retro livered B757 of BA will be operating the Morning shuttle 30/10/10.
In at 08:40 and out again at 10:00. I know the BA B757 has been in too numerous times to count, but it is the final day of B757 ops for BA, so catch it while you can!

[Manchester Exile]

I apologise to any readers who have been bored by this, but I refuse to let my local airport get a slagging off when
a) they wernt really to blame for the scenario.
b) it was a non event, the plane arrived at gate near enough on time, so no pax lost any time. I just think its been blown waay out of proportion.

a) I wasn't slagging off the airport. I was reporting on what dozens of the airport's customers were saying about it. Winning business is very hard in a competitive market, and a negative experience will not encourage people to return.

b) I can assure you that the affected passengers did not think of it as a non-event. And to dismiss it as such is perhaps symptomatic of a wider problem with our country.

[Curious Pax]

The early arrival of EY015 should not have taken anyone by surprise as we were told at Abu Dhabi, whilst still parked on the gate, that we would be arriving around 25 minutes early. I don't know who decides on stand allocation, but the delay could not have been because nobody expected the flight to arrive early.

No offence intended by my posts.

None taken. However you don't seem to think through some of the things you say. You were on the gate in Abu Dhabi, so say 8 hours before the scheduled arrival at MAN, so around 2300 the previous night MAN time. I've no idea which aircraft was on 'your' stand, but looking at the enthusiast logs at aircraft that departed around 0715-0730 I suspect it was either a Monarch A300 or a TCX 767. If it was the TCX then maybe something could have been done as that didn't arrive until around 0450, so a stand change would have been less of a big deal if announced 6 hours previously. However if it was the MON then that had already arrived and was presumably therefore on the stand just after 2200. Monarch and the airport certainly aren't going to pay for their aircraft to be moved for Etihad's convenience, and in these cost-conscious times I doubt Etihad would foot the bill.

[wanna_be_there]

Manchester exile:

a) I wasn't slagging off the airport

I refer you back to:

pride has turned to embarrassment and such a low standard of service

How can I make this any clearer. You were on an A340-600. Only stands 12 and 31 at T1 are capable of holding this, as well as many remotes and 4 gates at T2. The A340-600 comes into MAN on a scheduled basis maybe 2/3 times a year, so before you say 'why arnt more stands created', it wouldnt make commercial or economic sense. There was a nightstopping aircraft on 31 which was rightly still loading as it wasnt due off until around 07:55. A delayed passenger or another circumstance may have added to a small delay. Ive since found out The Etihad was offered 81, which is a remote but meant the pax could have disembarked quicker, but the captain refused. So whos fault is this? Oh yes, the captains.

b) I can assure you that the affected passengers did not think of it as a non-event. And to dismiss it as such is perhaps symptomatic of a wider problem with our country.

IT WAS A NON EVENT. Your scheduled arrival time was 0710, and you arrived on gate a 0714! Therefore, there was no delay, and you got off the aircraft at the time you were supposed to.

To quote you on something else:

After spending 29 hours on my journey, it was not a welcome development.

Lets just say for a minute, that the EY15 had LANDED at MAN on time, you would have still been on the aircraft for that extra 47 minutes. The only difference is, you were on the ground. So, how is being on the aircraft for the legnth of time you had originally planned for an 'unwelcome development'?
What I am trying to say is, you arrived at the stand at the time you were supposed to, at the time stated when you booked your ticket. So, basically everyone is pi***d off because they arrived on time. Do you see what Im getting at here.
Therefore, an on time arrival at gate is a non event.

Earlier this year, the aircraft arrived at the gate on time for my flight into LHR, so, Im going to write a very very strong worded letter to BAA that this is not acceptable. Wonder how serious they will take it?

[mickyman]

Manchester Exile

YOU are solely responsible for your aircrafts failure to
keep to its schedule.The 'I love my city / airport just
doesnt wash i'm afraid - why did you leave then?
You probably stood on the plane and cajouled the others
into moaning about the 'alledged' delay in disembarkation.
If YOU had not been on the flight then everything would
have been hunky-dory.Finding that YOU were aboard
meant that the airport 'manufactured' the delay just
to get on your wick! YOU should not be allowed to fly into
MAN again ever!

wanna b their

Can you have the lie-down in the darkened room now please!


MM

[easyflyer83]

So thecaptains explanation was very limited indeed. He didn't elude to the fact that a larger a/c than usual being operated and that it had arrived earlier. Therefore there was no real reason given to the passengers. It is often said that people are more understanding if they are explained to, even in laymans terms, and kept informed. In this instance it doesn't seem like this happened.

Thanks to wanna be there who has determined that EY was offered another parking stand and this was declined by the Captain. Whether or not the captain didn't realise the wait would be that long I am not sure but it was his decision and consequently his "cock up". And even when I say that I don't think we should be too critical of the captain as it wasn't a "huge" event. Put people here seem to want to issue the blame. That said, my experience in the industry would not surprise me if the commander was on a high and mighty I am god mood. My opinion only so don't get too upset about it.

Some of you will say that EY, EK are above and couldn't possibly accept the use of remote stand but they can, will and in practice, do so on a daily basis around the world.

[MANFlyer]

Good grief...even though I didn't think it possible, this board has got worse. :ugh:

You don't get as many childish and defensive posts on airliners.net as you do on here, and that's a Plane Spotties website.

Manchester Exile, I know exactly what you are talking about mate, but you're wasting your time trying to tell the Emu's on here, they just won't have it. Dont bother, it's time you'll never get back. After all, you sound like a very frequent business traveller, so what the hell do you know about airports compared to the 'experts' on here.....:p

Manchester Airport has won 'awards' you know. :D

[Fernanjet]

i've never known an on-time arrival on stand get so much coverage....

pathetic.....

can we move on now?

[easyflyer83]

MANflyer, few fly quite as much as myself.

Yes it is getting quite tiresome. There was an initial over reaction to a simple delay caused by a simple stand allocation. As we have determined, EY decided not to use the alternative allocated by MAN and consequently they had to wait. As a result it was EY who delayed it's passengers. I think perhaps we should leave it as that as even I am getting tired.

Those of you who don't skim read will realise that I have never denied that MAN has it's problems (like most airports/facillities) but the situation last Friday wasn't one of them.

I think the problem is that we have self professed Alan Wickers transiting places like DXB and seeing the, admittedly fantastic, terminal there but not fully appreciating, nor understanding the frame work and indeed context behind the development of such facilities. Staying with DXB as an example, it was little more than a sandpit 20 years ago but the whole area has enjoyed extensive development backed by a rich royal family and investors and the airport has fed off this. That is just a DXB specific example of course but MAN and the UK as a whole aren't necassarilly as rich and seen as much rapid development. As much as I love Manchester (despite not being born Manc) and a great City it is, it is not a particular 'powerhouse' of anything since the cotton trade and the airport is publicly owned. Yet despite that, the airport has flourished and enjoys some excellent links that similar Cities could only dream of. It certainly isn't a glass palace and certain cosmetic issues need to be addressed (yes travelators im sure) but fundamentally it is a good, sound and well run place. You may mock, but those awards were won for a reason.

I don't work for MAN or MAG and I was not born and bred in Manchester. Up until 8 years ago I was Barnsley born and bred. ;)

[paully]

MANflyer

Nail... Head... Hit :D:D

Now please can the Mods declare playtime over :ugh:

[steve platt]

Manflyer

Well said. Bunch of snobby idiots who argue like kids mostly on this forum. I rarely post on here anymore i prefer to give my info to people who listen and take notice.

Nice one people!

[scrapy]

Aer Arann/Lingus increasing flights to Shannon from 7 to 11 per week. Additional morning flights on Mondays, Thursdays, Fridays and Sundays.

[johnnychips]

Just suddenly struck me that if you want a flight on an old plane from MAN, Belgium is the place to go. F50s to Antwerp and RJs to Brussels. Any posters any idea how long this will last?

No doubt Dash's and E190s are more efficient, but meanwhile it's your chance to enjoy these old planes (and the beer and chocolate).

[mytravela330]

dont think the F50`s of VLM go into Man anymore.....

[Ian Brooks]

The F50 still do Antwerp which is performing very well

Ian B

[mytravela330]

sorry Ian your right, its the London City flights they dropped....my apologies..

[Ian Brooks]

mytravela330
No problemshttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/embarass.gif


Ian B

[Bagso]

As much as I love Manchester (despite not being born Manc) and a great City it is, it is not a particular 'powerhouse' of anything since the cotton trade and the airport is publicly owned

Sorry Easyflyer, can't let that one slide under the radar !

Manchester is actually a major powerhouse in a number of areas and the airport activity reflects this, it is light years ahead of other "UK regional" cities, its just not universally recognised.

Of the top 20,000 companies in the UK 95% have their "second " HQ at Manchester. This growth is coupled to the level of academic research, it has largest and thee most popular campus in Europe with Manchester University amongst the top 100 in the world.

In terms of technology it is second only to London in terms of server capacity ! There are more data centre's here than the rest of the UK put together. Whilst some may question why the BBC are moving a signifciant part of their operation out of London, you cannot argue with the choice of location (yes OK its Salford, 2 miles from Manchester City Centre).

Retail - The major brands who choose to open second outlets outside London they almost always choose Manchester as the "proving" ground ! Next month The Avenue opens with tops brands normally found in Paris and Milan

Manchester United - arguably a worldwide draw, the largest football team on the planet apart from Real Madrid.

Stadia - MEN arena largest indoor arena outside London.

Property - Beetham Tower not exactly a beacon of iconic architecture, but functional, oversubscribed before it opened, and the largest residential tower in Europe !

Business, Art, Culture, Tourism, Sporting etc which ever you choose ..... those are the reasons WHY the airport is relatively successful !

[Skipness One Echo]

Of the top 20,000 companies in the UK 95% have their "second " HQ at Manchester.

107.32% of statistics are made up you know. I'm not attacking Manchester but I can't think of any firm I have ever worked for which has a "second HQ".

Anyway I think this may have been posted but G-CPET is operating BA1384 / 1389 0840 1000 LHR LHR on Sat 30-Oct. One last time down memeory lane as she is now in the original 1983 livery. Am booked LHR-GLA on her next leg and penultimate flight with BA.

[MUFC_fan]

Manchester United - arguably a worldwide draw, the largest football team on the planet apart from Real Madrid.


Ah...as you, I cannot let this one slip under the radar. Manchester United are the largest club of any sport on the planet according to Forbes. Arsenal are bigger than Real Madrid!

Manchester United and Tiger Woods top Forbes money list (http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/179433/manchester-united-and-tiger-woods-top-forbes-money-list)

Manchester United retain number one spot in Forbes rich list despite £741m debt - Goal.com (http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2010/07/22/2037643/manchester-united-retain-number-one-spot-in-forbes-rich-list)


107.32% of statistics are made up you know


These people don't make things up...

As most know, football is one of the world's biggest businesses and therefore one of the greatest attractions not only to the greatest of businessmen and women but also sports fans.

This therefore has a knock on effect on the economic state of a region and Manchester Airport plays a key role in this.

Manchester City, Bolton and Wigan aren't exactly put offs...well the first one is for me but you know what I mean...;)

[Ian Brooks]

Manchester is now one of the top conference and meeting venues in the world
When I started work there were 4 real hotels in Manchester now I have totally lost count of hotels within about 3 miles of city centre and more are being built as we speak, not many of the major chains not seen here now so that speaks for it`s self

Ian B

[easyflyer83]

Bagso, I am absolutely aware of what you have stated. I went to Uni here and the course was something that often focused on several of the areas you highlight. However, Manchester United, Selfridges, MEN Arena and a tall hotel cum appartment block does not make a City a powerhouse. They all contribute to a vibrant, exciting City but none of them particularly make Manchester outstanding.

Manchester is a great City....I love this place but I am not going to pretend that it is a powerhouse when it is not. With the birth of the industrial revolution and the cotton industry peak, Manchester was indeed a great powerhouse but has since lost the status that very few Cities enjoy. London, for example, is a powerhouse.....it has probably the worlds largest Financial centre. I wouldn't class Barcelona, San Francisco nor Rome as powerhouses either because there are actually so few.

MAN as an airport fully deserves and is very capable of sustaining the routes and carriers which operates there but at the same time has attracted a portfolio of carriers and routes that many similar sized Cities, including many Capital cities, do not enjoy.

[Ian Brooks]

Forget heavy industry that just does not happen anymore, Manchester has a huge finacial area with major banks from the states and europe including the Co-op Bank
HQ, if Manchester had been relying on heavy industry it would be in the same mess as Birmingham is with huge unemployment which has not happened here, you go out to Salford quays and media city and see how things have changed over the last 10 years. Media city when finished will be a premier base for the film and TV industry,
it is attracting the film makers to the area (Captain America just finished to name the latest)
I am very proud of Manchester and being an ex Londoner can see how it has pulled it`s self round and is a major European business city but agreed it has a lot further to go but that`s another story.
Re Man U it is a major busniess and brings a lot of money to the cities ( Manchester and Salford )
Manchester University has grown to be a university to rival most in Europe




Ian B

[easyflyer83]

Ian I wasn't saying that it all revolves around industry hence why I cited the London example. i.e a Financial Centre. You mention Manchester's financial sector which is growing but still lacks behind Leeds at the moment. Even so, Leeds isn't a powerhouse either.

Again, with regards to the University district I am well aware of the fact that Manchester has the biggest student population in Europe but does that necassarilly make the City a powerhouse? I don't think it does.

The BBC may lead to something big but MediaCity is still very much in it's infancy and Manchester United, whilst a powerhouse in it's own right in sporting terms, comparatively speaking it does not create a huge amount of money for Greater Manchester. In fact you can argue that much of Man Utd's money doesn't touch Greater Manchester in any way, shape or form.

Like I said though, when I think powerhouse I think London, Dubai, New York etc. I would regard relatively few Cities as such.

[MUFC_fan]

Like I said though, when I think powerhouse I think London, Dubai, New York etc. I would regard relatively few Cities as such.


What do we class as a powerhouse?

Global city - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city)

Dubai doesn't even come close...

[rapidman47]

Hate to dampen your spirits easy and Ian, But Captain America has been filming in Liverpool for the past four weeks.
I know i am one of the extras:E
Liverpool Daily Post - News - Liverpool News - Captain America filming to get underway on Liverpool docklands (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2010/09/16/captain-america-filming-to-get-underway-on-liverpool-docklands-92534-27278123/)

[mickyman]

There is nothing wrong with being proud of your city
but sometimes people 'enthuse' a little bit too much.
Manchester's industrial history is remarkable and cannot
be argued with.

The airport sustains a varied amount of services that
are in themselves remarkable and we should all try to be
realistic when discussing future growth.

An English Munich perhaps.

MM

[wanna_be_there]

There was an article recently that stated Manchester is now the UK's second city in terms of business, based on mori data.
I wont post the link on here again, as the last time, I attempted to link the article to the stats that business travel was increasing but the post was deleted, and I dont want the same to happen again.

[mickyman]

MUFC_Fan

Although 'Wiki' can be useful it is only contributor led
and can infact state wrong info!

MM

[Ian Brooks]

Captain America was filmed for a month on Dale Street in Manchester and finished last week, I know some was filmed in Liverpool but Manchester Northern 1/4 was chosen for it`s lookalike streets to parts of New York in 1940`s
Captain America Filming in Manchester|Blog about the Filming of Captain America Movie in Manchester's Northern Quarter (http://captainamericafilmingmanchester.co.uk/) well worth a look, a bit off track but
what the hell!

Ian B

[easyflyer83]

I think one or two of you are mistaking me for saying that Manchester has nothing going for it. It does, in fact it has a hell of a lot that is why I said I am proud of the City. However, whilst i truly believe it is on a par with Barcelona, Milan and Munich, it certainly isn't on a par with a City such as London or New York which i regard as powerhouses. By the way I don't particularly like London.

Wanna be there is correct in asking what do we regard as a power house. In my opinion a power house is something that differenciates a City, something that the City is renowned for in economic terms and not stadia, arena's and such which many other Cities around the world also has.

[Ian Brooks]

Captain America was filmed for a month on Dale Street in Manchester and finished last week, I know some was filmed in Liverpool but Manchester Northern 1/4 was chosen for it`s lookalike streets to parts of New York in 1940`s
Captain America Filming in Manchester|Blog about the Filming of Captain America Movie in Manchester's Northern Quarter (http://captainamericafilmingmanchester.co.uk/) well worth a look, a bit off track but
what the hell!

Ian B

[wanna_be_there]

Aaaanyway,

1)I see the 'united' continental B757 has been in today. Is this the first UK visit, or even more so, the first european outing since the conversion to the new airline?

2) Ive read elsewhere that DL may send to A330 on the ATL-MAN run next year. This is partly because loads/cargo have picked up, and some B767-400's moving to JFK and A330's moving to ATL.

3) It is long rumoured CX will come to MAN, and again Ive read that CX is about to add 4 weekly HKG-XXX-CDG and return flights on the A343. Some say DME, some say FCO. But given DME is already an open route, FCO being off the great circle route and we were so close to having a HKG-DME-MAN on an A343, could MAN be the intermidiate stop?
I dont know about yields, but there are certainly enough pax heading off that way. (the CAA last counted 138000 pax heading MAN-LHR-HKG per anum)

[spannersatcx]

HKG-DME-MAN on an A343, could MAN be the intermidiate stop?
nope, no, never, not at all!

[wanna_be_there]

nope, no, never, not at all!

Spanners, what are you saying no to? A CX route to MAN, MAN being an intermediate stop or a HKG-DME-MAN routing as you highlighted that bit of my text too.
With regards to the HKG-DME-MAN route I posted, I agree that one will never happen again as DME is well established now and very unlikely to be split again, I was commenting on the fact they announced and put it up for sale before it was cancelled due to govt permission not being granted not so long ago (2007-8??).

[spannersatcx]

of the 138K that travelled MAN-LHR-HKG a good percentage flew CX, CX will not jeopardise services out of LHR no matter what. := So do not expect a CX pax service out of MAN in the near/medium term.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

If Cathay don't want to "jeopardise" LHR services that is their own commercial choice to make. But I used CX on a number of occasions when they operated MAN-originating services. However, I avoid LHR like the plague, as do many experienced travelers from the regions. Now I use EMIRATES FROM MAN via DXB for HKG. Not everybody will slavishly follow an airline to the inconvenient hub of their choosing. I will choose my own preferred route to HKG, thanks very much Mr Cathay - and LHR ain't it!

If CX stick to LHR only they will keep the mugs who know no better and some desperate bargain-basement fare hunters. However, they forfeit the savvy travelers who are familiar with the attractive alternatives from MAN (including many high yield frequent fliers). The best way to protect your market is to provide a service which customers consider the most attractive available. Changing at LHR (even when your Shuttle isn't cancelled) doesn't score well.

[Skipness One Echo]

If CX stick to LHR only they will keep the mugs who know no better and some desperate bargain-basement fare hunters. However, they forfeit the savvy travelers who are familiar with the attractive alternatives from MAN

Not a good way to talk about people really. We're not all mugs and Heathrow isn't all bad and I would politely remind you that it supports a Hell of alot of jobs in the UK. By all means sneer as you board Emirates and think you are supporting your "local" market, which of course you are, but please be advised there is another view.

That Cathay have sunk a small fortune in building a OneWorld hub with their partners QANTAS and BA at T3. That millions are being spent providing world class lounge facilities for premium travellers and that a decision must be made on how best to get a return on that investment. T3 is an old building of course but over time the whole airfield is being rebuilt from the ground up. T5 done, T2 on it's way and T3 being re-aligned once Pier 7 comes down. Now that's a fair bit of money going into the UK economy in troubled times. Just bear that in mind please.

tbh as much as I love MAN, a lot of supporters are L O C A L s in every sense of the word. Good grief this thread is unique on here reading more like Manchester's place in the world and less like what's going on at MAN which is what we're keen to read about and support. I also resent being addressed as a sheep, it's just a baad argument!

[Betablockeruk]

Good grief this thread is unique on here reading more like Manchester's place in the world and less like what's going on at MAN which is what we're keen to read about and support.

Yep, this place used to include rumours about Airlines, Airports & Routes. If someone could create a forum specifically for such info then that would be great :ok:

Putting the relentless MAN vs LHR arguments aside, will we see a Chinese Gov reaction to the recent Taiwan agreement, whether that be Beijing and/or Hong Kong services? I do recall that we were on the CAAC expansion plans before the industry took a downturn.

Could the most recent rumour of a CX return actually be generated from an urgency from mainland China not to concede East Asia market share?

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Hi Skipness!

Good to spar with you again! May I politely point out that my posting does not call anybody a moron - that is your word. I can assure you that I do not "sneer" as I board Emirates or any other carrier, but I do thank the heavens that I don't have to endure a Heathrow transfer. I am delighted that CX and co are spending so much to improve LHR (it needs the investment) as I have friends who live in the South East and LHR is conveniently placed for them. So I hope they enjoy their improved airport experience.

As for being a L O C A L, I am the kind of local who has flown as a passenger on some 1400 flights covering around 400 airports in 80 or so countries, several of which are not mainstream names. So I guess I am just a "blinkered provincial" for wishing to avoid the dire OneLondon Alliance transfer procedure at LHR. But I accept that I am more than happy to be associated with the Manchester area, so I shall take the "local" tag as a great compliment. Everyone is local somewhere.

And by the way, MAN services support a "hell of a lot of jobs" in the UK too. Manchester is actually in the UK. Our tax pounds end up in the same pot as those earned at Heathrow. A customer is not unpatriotic in booking a convenient MAN departure over an inconvenient LHR one (cancelled Shuttles permitting). Do you seriously believe that we should put up with the LHR transfer process for the good of the UK economy?!!! Give us a break, please!

SHED.

P.S. Skipness - good to see that you edited out the word "moron" at 15:06!

[Skipness One Echo]

Yes "mugs" and "sheeples" is complimentary towards people but "morons" is just baad. (did it again).

Can we move on please? What's happening with Viking Hellas? Are they going tango uniform?

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

"mugs" - sadly, not everybody in this world is deserving of compliments!

"sheeple" - a term used in my posting to illustrate the opinion of certain remote airline executives towards their customers (i.e. they will accept being herded through LHR). I went on to point out the error of that assumption. Well-informed customers will book the journey which best suits their own needs, not those of an airline executive with a flawed business plan and crossed fingers.

Perhaps as you say the point has been made now. And besides, I can't take any more baaaaad jokes!

SHED.

[Skipness One Echo]

Good grief man, you're actually saying that people who book with British based BMI and BA are too dumb to make an informed choice?

That's pretty condescending I think. If it was a case of once bitten twice shy then the Heathrow services of both carriers would have closed long ago as passengers flocked to worship in the aisles of other airlines.

not those of an airline executive with a flawed business plan and crossed fingers.
That'll be BMI then? Though now under the wings of Lufthansa, we're seeing better things.

Is a Singapore B77W as far as Munich before getting chucked off again that much better if you're changing at Changi?

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Good Grief, Skipness! You're putting an awful lot of words into my mouth there! I think you'll find my postings don't say anything of the sort! Condescending comments? They might have been if I'd made them!

I use BMI myself on MAN-LHR. However, my destination on such occasions is LONDON. I gave up on the BA Shuttle after they cancelled on me once too often. "We suggest you make your way back home, Sir", they said. "I'm trying to," I replied, "I paid you to fly me there!"

I note also that there are destinations to which a LHR connection is the only practical option (HKG *not* being one of them). The MAN-LHR flights have a role to play servicing these.

Regarding some people who book MAN-LHR to connect onto routes which are better served by alternatives from MAN, I consider them "less well informed". You may call them "too dumb" if you wish, but I don't expect them to have an encyclopedic knowledge of world airline timetables so I'm a bit more forgiving. I am less forgiving towards certain professional travel agents who book unsuspecting passengers on these routes for reasons other than the customers' best interests. I refer to their victims as "mugs" - because they have effectively been mugged and usually don't even know it. However, I certainly won't criticize "unpatriotic" travelers who book a route which bypasses the hassles of LHR and represents the optimal routing for their own needs.

As for the business plans of BMI and Singapore Airlines, I never mentioned them. ("That'll be BMI then?" - errr, no!). If you wish to comment on them further, the discussion board is yours - man!

Cheers, SHED.

[wanna_be_there]

Spannersatcx,

Whilst I understand you work for CX, how are you so sure CX wont open a MAN route in the medium term?
The transfer at LHR numbers have been hovering around 138000 for a couple of years now, and were no far off that when they 'launched' HKG-DME-MAN.

As more people become savvy to the fact there are more options than LHR, CX and oneworld will stat to loose pax through filtration.
As well as those travelling on BA/bmi to LHR, you have those going through DXB, AUH, DOH, FRA, AMS, CDG, ZRH and to a lesser extent SIN.
Another point to consider MAN has now been included in the UK/Taiwan agreement, and with a large amount of pax heading that way it could be another hole CX will bleed pax through.

Add to this oneworld carrier are now gaining ATI, it means there could be more pax travelling through LHR from the likes of ORD and other ports without a direct connection (I know ORD isnt the best example but just trying to illustrate a point).
Surely it would be better to run some of the extremly high Northern customers through MAN and save the LHR services for the south east and other connections.
Even if the pax are lower yielding, a 2 class service could work, and with such a large cargo operation im sure the belly can stem any losses?

Looking at it logically, Its not as crazy as you think.

[spannersatcx]

When I first read about the number of pax travelling via LHR to HKG I passed it on higher up the tree and that's the answer I was given.

MAN-SVO-HKG never happened for the reasons we know about, we used to code share with aeroflot, we don't now as we put our own a/c on the route and it got sent to DME instead.

The price of MAN-?-HKG was pitched far higher than MAN-LHR-HKG, so the savvy punters would of done that unless they preferred the convenience of travelling from MAN-?-HKG.

A lot of it is a cultural thing as well, CX being very snobbish and preffering to put a/c into capital/major cities (waits for the flak). The proverbial hit the fan when we pulled out of Zurich.

We were hoping for the 3 M's to be new routes, Milan, Moscow and MAN, but it was only the 2. Unless you count the Miami freighter service of course.

We wait with baited breath.

[steve platt]

Betablockeruk....

You know where u get all the proper news and views on the other better forum.....Better leave Mr Skipness and his Snobby Cronies to this load of crap!!!!!!!

[Ian Brooks]

I tend to agree with you Steve, it seems to be the hot bed of info nowadayshttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif


Ian B

[TSR2]

Since the introduction of a daily A380 on the 1st September, the passenger numbers increased from 48,173 in August to 48, 890 in September. That is an increase of 717 in the 30 day month which equates to an average daily increase of 4.87%.

[BDLBOS]

MAN would be better served with a *A or Skyteam member. Oneworld/CX is poorly served in the Asia market. CA to PEK, MU to PVG or CZ to CAN offers some interesting opportunities.

[mybrico]

One World poorly served into Asia:= What about CX and KA as well JAL, whats needed is a direct flight to a worthwhile hub - going to AsiaPac via the sandpit is not a good solution, wake up in the middle of the night to change planes, no thanks.

[Ian Brooks]

The Paris fuel shortage maybe starting to bite as AFR306 is due in Manchester
in about 20 minutes en-route Seattle


Ian B

[tb10er]

What about AY - they have a super product via HEL?

[His master'svoice]

Looking at those figures, the increase in EK pax is 1.48% over the month

[TSR2]

Correct. But September was a 30 day month whilst August was 31. That is why the average daily increase is 4.87%

[The96er]

The Paris fuel shortage maybe starting to bite as AFR306 is due in Manchester
in about 20 minutes en-route Seattle


I thought the taps had been turned back on in Paris ! - any more diverts expected ?

[Egerton Flyer]

I'd say yes, Transat flight on the way in.

E.F.

[BDLBOS]

My comment on Oneworld is operating in Asia, not into. Into Asia from MAN you have LHR or HEL. Skyteam is AF/KL. Star LH/SR/SK. But once you are here, then Oneworld has the poorest options of the three.

[Ringwayman]

Of course for EK, we could report the increase as per the CAA with a comparison with September 2009: 11%

[Manchester Exile]

According to the CAA provisional statistics, it was a good month all round for the middle eastern carriers from Manchester. Compared to September 2009, Dubai was up by 12%; Abu Dhabi was up by 42%; and Doha grew by 2%. The only negative was the loss of services to Saudi Arabia, but traffic was fairly negligible on those routes in September 2009 (fewer than 2,000 passengers.)

[wanna_be_there]

EY: the figures were bound to be good with such a large increase of seats on the B777 vs A330. The B773 is back in november, and a lounge opening soon the figures should increase more so.

EK: when the EK17/18 went to an A388, it was said there was a capacity increase of 20%. Most of that increase was in the F/J cabin so a 12% increase is very very good, it means an increase in the money making cabins.

QR: these services have remained an A330 for a couple of years now, and with constant increases month on month, along with cargo, one has to wonder when the route will be increased to a B773, or, an increase of frequency to say, 10 or 11 weekly?
Also, to keep up with EK/EY, I wonder if QR will look at building a lounge at MAN?

[airchina787]

I see nobody picked up on the news that NZ have applyed for four slots a week at MAN then strating within the next 13 months. :ok:

[globetrotter79]

airchina787 - do you have a source for this NZ news?

[airchina787]

a few leads, one from airliners.net, the other from plane-mad.com, you have to look at the manchester section , summer into winter topic. and a couple of other leads from within the company.

also heard that AC is coming back , can anyone shed light on this, ment to be with a 763. slated for next year too.

From what is being discussed MAN seems to be having some new life put into it next year. and longhual routes are expanding lots..

[Skipness One Echo]

The Air New Zealand one is a madcap fantasy (in my view) from planemad.com that's taken hold on airliners.net. Again they're throwing darts at a world map working out what the intermediate stop will be on this new service.

The man chatting about the AC return is quoting MAN-YUL (Montreal-Dorval) which I would be quite surprised at. I would say with Zoom gone, yields on the return of the seasonal AC840/841 YYZ service would be much better, but I'm not sure why they would choose Dorval given that onward connections are mainly through Toronto and Manchester is not famously French speaking.
I'd love to see the MAN-YYZ back though.

Take it with a pinch of "sel".
I'll get me coat.

[Ian Brooks]

Planemad has been the most accurate site for quite a while now and has broken news
on several new routes before anybody else, many of the guys on there work at the airport, so give the guys a bit of slack.

Make sure your coat is made of Kevlar

Ian B

[wanna_be_there]

The Air New Zealand one is a madcap fantasy (in my view) from planemad.com

What is madcap about NZ? Its been long knowlegeable that they have been looking into MAN, and with the likes of EK/EY/QR/BA/QF and so on taking the cream of the crop, whats wrong with a star carrier wanting take their share of the market? EK themselves have said the MAN market demand is far from being met, so someone somewhere must have a chance of getting their piece of the market. (yes the market may not be to NZ, but by some pax seeking a better option, means EK can concentrate on filling its 'unmet demand'
As for planemad, Most of the guys on that forum, unlike some other sites are mostly genuine airline/airport workers. If they have prior knowlege to something happening and they dont mind sharing the info, they choose this site over others to post on.
The guy posting the info has been right about a few things now, such as EK upping to the A380 this year, VS adding LAS and upping BGI, JFK going year round and the new UK-TPE air agreement just before it hit mainstream sites. Give the site a chance, I know your an analyst and supposedly know the trends and so on but these guys are directly involved in some of the stuff being said there.

they're throwing darts at a world map working out what the intermediate stop will be on this new service

That may be a given but there are good reasons as to why each stop could work. I personally think its between LAX/HKG, (LAX as its a big port for NZ and would be the logical choice, but you cant ignore the fact 138000 are transiting LHR for HKG alone. Yes we dont know about yields but that is a flippin large number!)

I'd love to see the MAN-YYZ back though.

Thats one of the few good things Ive heard you say about MAN. I think AC should come back to MAN. The star presence is slowly building (not really any new routes, but frequency wise star connections are increasing). We only have TS/TCX for YYZ now and I think as business travel seems to be getting better from MAN, the AC biz cabin could work better. Also, as seen as EK/EY/QR cant get more access to canada, maybe pax could get there through MAN (I know there are no code shares but so many internet options now mean pax can book 2 seperate tickets)

Skipness, I know if none of the above happens you will be first to say 'told you so', but for now can you at least spare a little benefit of the doubt, as even analysts can missjudge things.

[Skipness One Echo]

Thats one of the few good things Ive heard you say about MAN

I think Manchester is a great airport, I think the people are much friendlier than London but I try not to let my heart rule my head. For the love of God they're certainly more pro-aviation, but if I'm being honest being a Scot, I see the "local" effect in place a lot that I saw back home.

Bear in mind Company X flying from A to B is NOT the same as Company X making money flying from A to B. I don't see how a small-ish home market like New Zealand can make money flying direct to Manchester.

It's not about taking the cream of the crop or a star carrier wanting take their share of the marketIt's about making money, having a return on investment and a dividend for shareholders. I grant you it's possible they might start the service. Seeing it pay is another matter entirely.

I have little doubt marketing have been pushing for it as I work in analytics and some of the stuff marketing comes out with is from the planet of "blue sky thinking". to put it mildly. The danger is they end up filling a B777 to LAX or YVR with good Y fares with not enough onward connections to NZ. I suspect the NZ option would remain more attractive (i.e. cheaper) on a new A380 via DXB. Actually I got the A380 wrong, I thought MAN would not be up there so quickly but happy to be wrong on that score. I'm not anti MAN, just anti dartboard route planning. I see too much of that at work.

Yes we dont know about yields but that is a flippin large number!
Big numbers on BA from LHR to Australia but even with LHR's good yields it's still a loss maker for them.

Skipness, I know if none of the above happens you will be first to say 'told you so', but for now can you at least spare a little benefit of the doubt, as even analysts can missjudge things.

I hope that's not something I have ever said. If I have said that, it's unworthy of good debate and I apologise. However I refuse to get caught up in the orgasmic fanboy speculation of other places.

[Ian Brooks]

wanna_be_there
well said that manhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif
People who work on the coalface so to speak tend to the 1st to find out what is bubbling under, they might not come off for many reasons i:e Cathay 2 years ago
but if an airlines has applied for slots and are talking to the airport authority must be quite serious about starting.
Manchester is now quite a serious Star Alliance hub and anything like Air New Zealand/Air Canada
is going make it`s presence even more important as it would create a new spoke and
bring more pax from Europe to connect

Ian B

[Skipness One Echo]

Manchester is now quite a serious Star Alliance hub

Spoke surely. It feeds INTO the serious STAR hubs at FRA, MUC, ZRH etc.

[wanna_be_there]

I think Manchester is a great airport, I think the people are much friendlier than London but I try not to ley my heart rule my head. For the love of God they're certainly more pro-aviation, but if I'm being honest being a Scot, I see the "local" effect in place a lot that I saw back home

I think this is what it all boils down to. We are all proud of our 'little' airport, and amidst all the decline we cling on to any good news we can get. I can tell you that NZ have certainly looked into MAN, but as to how serious, well, we all know that sort of information is confidential and not something I am privvy to.

Bear in mind Company X flying from A to B is NOT the same as Company X making money flying from A to B. I don't see how a small-ish home market like New Zealand can make money flying direct to Manchester.

I think this is a given, but with EK even saying demand is unmet, with such a large connection base I wondere where the 'unmet' demand is to?
Ive read somwhere that NZ has a good casm and low operating costs, so whilst it seems I am throwing darts, I think tapping into the HKG/AKL market at the same time could prove beneficial. Im not advocating a 2 daily B744 service, but maybe a 3-4 weekly B772 service. The seat count is lower, the risk is lower (its pretty much a proven market) and gives pax that extra option.

Actually I got the A380 wrong, I thought MAN would not be up there so quickly

In all fairness, not many thought EK would have sent a 3 class A388 to MAN before the likes of PVG/HKG/JFK? MAN was always on the cards for an A388, but maybe further down the pecking order or a 2 class varient. I think its a case example of showing just how the market dynamics are changing. Yes SQ are on a smaller scale and Via MUC, but who can sit here and honestly say a year ago they forecasted that there would be 2 first class cabins going east by the end of 2010?

I think travel agents can be blamed for the mass migration to LHR for the longhaul flights in the past, as they are usually the 1st options and cheapest. As more people book online and realise the options, I think we will see more of this pattern emerging.

fanboy speculation of other places

a.net, yes is quite fanboy now, but like Ive said before, planemad is actually quite accurate and 90% of posters are genuinly connected to the news they are posting. yes there are some spotters as with every other site, but Id take news off their anyday over other sites.

However I will say Thank you for such a balanced response Skipness

[Ian Brooks]

Wanna_be_there

A lot of the time the travel agent isn`t really given the option, most business clients to
be fair would rather give their business to a British company first before going to a non UK airline, however BA have never really had any interest in the regions other than a token to show face, they are more for forcing them through Fortress London.
Route deals were done with companies and nearly always the best fare was from London with the shuttle thrown in, which is the same as most tour operators who use
them find as well.
If you were to draw an imaginary line through say North Birmingham accross the country, the people to the north of the line would much prefer Manchester as the departure point ( sorry Birmingham not trying to pinch your traffic but just trying to
prove a point)

Ian B

[Skipness One Echo]

BA have never really had any interest in the regions other than a token to show face, they are more for forcing them through Fortress London.

Ian this is what I mean. People take it personally. Let me try and be dispassionate for a minute. BA used to be a state controlled virtual monopoly. This is the reason that they had a legacy presence outside London. They still struggle with the cost base of their cabin crew as a result. See the BA vs BASSA thread to see what I mean.

The only place BA ever made real money was Heathrow. Commercially, there was little business case for capital investment of new equipment outside of LHR. Even LGW is stuck with classic B737s.

It's got nothing to do with loyalty. BA has been a PLC for over two decades.

[Ian Brooks]

I used to work in the travel industry and know what used to go on,7 they promised the earth to Manchester, got Manchester to build a terminal for them and then said bye bye
The girl who lived next door to us was a BA long haul stewedess and used to commute on the shuttle and I know many others who used to do that.

Ian B

[Skipness One Echo]

I used to work in the travel industry and know what used to go on they promised the earth to Manchester, got Manchester to build a terminal for them and then said bye bye

Yes they did and they shouldn't have. Actually with hindsight and that cost base, they couldn't even compete on European short haul.
Two broad options

MAN to alliance hub with feed ie ZRH, FRA, MUC on legacy cost base
MAN to holiday or business destination on LCC cost base
MAN to Europe on point to point with no feed and legacy cost base

The last one is BA and they were squeezed by the first two into smaller aircraft, high fares bigger losses. Ideally, the regional routes from MAN, BHX and GLA should have been shut years ago, this is why the BAC111s lasted so long, this is why they got LHR B737-200s when the world was phasing them out. Commercially it was a battle that wasn't worth the fight as the number of people flying with the cheaper alternative multiplied.

Marketing men promise the Earth and often under deliver.

The girl who lived next door to us was a BA long haul stewedess and used to commute on the shuttle and I know many others who used to do that. Presumably removing a seat from revenue service to do so? Nice work if you can get it (!)

[wanna_be_there]

got Manchester to build a terminal for them
->Yes they did and they shouldn't have

I actually think BA asking MAN to build T1-BA was a good thing for MAN. It spured MAN into action to add capacity that they may not have done off their own back, and later turning it into T3. Its kind of the same way EK asked MAN to build an A380 gate, it adds to the airports appeal.

So, what can we realistically expect for MAN in 2011? (announced and rumoured)

VS- adding LAS, upping BGI, MCO up to 11 weekly (all announced). No other expansion as the B747's are off for a refit so leaves very little slack for new routes. Id expect in 2012 ANU to be launched, thus completing what bmi had (minus ORD) and giving VH their capacity back.

UA/CO- Id honestly expect a B757 to ORD, alongside 2 daily EWR. Will the ORD route push AA off? with ATI Id hope not but the AA ORD tatl routes are few and far between nowdays

DL- Maybe have JFK go up to a B767-300. There were many upgrades to the B763 this summer so likely to be the same story next year but permanantly. Id also expect ATL to move to an A330 with the new crew base, as this year flights are regularly overbooked and cargo is good.

AA- JFK is already confirmed as year round, but Id think any new routes/frequencies are unlikely

EK- The long anticipated 3rd daily/morning flight. Id take a punt at a B777 due to cargo (EK has slashed cargo capacity by around 40% to accomodate the A380), and Id assume that even though the A330 will be better for a more levelled pax increase, it just wont do for cargo.

QR- maybe move up to the B773 due to cargo and maybe keep up with the Joneses. Either that or an increase of around 3-4 weekly with another A330. Due to fleet constraints, the B773 is more likely.

SQ- will they split MAN from MUC and have us as a say, 3 weekly B777 service again? they seem to chop and change that much its hard to say!

CI- With the new air agreement, their TPE hub, large volume of chinese pax, lower cost base and a low frequency, would they be interested? Adding that to the fact hey already have cargo ops, have never been allowed to serve MAN as a pax destination before, and LHR may not have slots that would be worthwhile to them, it could, just could see the light of day. Even more so if they combine us with say, VIE or somewhere to help fill up the cabins (not that they would need help).
Id certainly expect them to up their cargo frequency, they have been stuck at 3 weekly with no chance of increase for years now, and with the agreement upped to 10 weekly, Id be flabberghasted if they didnt increase.

EZY- Id expect 2 more based units and around 5-6 routes (3 per unit). Routes Id expect are:
-LIS, a new base and LIS is underserved from MAN as it is
-SAW, previously rumoured and give a cheap option to IST
-VIE, a good city route, not served from the north-west
-PRG, start a good bun fight with LS/WW
-FRA, Easy seem to like going after star routes from MAN
-AMM, has been rumoured and right outside the box!

Id say there is scope for more but these are my guesses.

WW- these have long rumoured to be expanding from MAN on niche routes, could 2011 finally be the year

LS- have already got a couple of new routes for 2011, but Id bet LS have more plans up their sleeve. Id expect TLV to go 4 weekly on the back end of 2011

So, thats my scope for 2011, what does everyone else think?

[Janu]

That sounds good to me!

[eggc]

wanna_be_there you forgot these...

Biman - but I won't hold my breath !
ANZ - 4 weekly via ???
ACA - possibly to return ? YUL mentioned, but surely it would be YYZ ?

AA - I don't see immediate growth, but we may see the return of both DFW and MIA at some stage.
US - there was talk of CLT. May happen in 2013 ?

[MUFC_fan]

I think we must be careful that all these TATL changes.

All airlines will now be competing to gain the upper ground. Certainly in the UK Oneworld rule the roost and overall within Europe I think they will have the greatest number of flights across both North and South America. Surely they don't want to give up that status?

My main point is that I hope all these airlines don't launch tens of routes and a number from MAN to gain first ground and/or retaliation to competing airlines operations to then realise they aren't profitable and then dump them.

Just a thought...

[Bagso]

ANZ......er they have applied before ! Sorry only us "old Gits" go back that far !

Simply applying for slots is no confirmation the flight will start, last time (circa 10 years back) it was just a bargaining chip.

They wanted extra flights into LHR and applied for additional service into BOTH LHR and MAN.... there was never any intention to serve MAN but the desired result quickly came to pass. They covered their tracks by applying for MAN in case they could not "up" the LHR service....

...and lo it then came to pass that slots suddenly became available and LHR increased !

Here endeth the 3rd lesson ! Hope i'm wrong !

[Bagso]

RE ANZ and indeed Cathay...

Is it possible the success of EK 380 plus the further planned 3rd daily is finally sparking airlines like Cathay into life as their forecast market share Ex London etc is "possibly" starting to erode ?

[MUFC_fan]

Manchester loses Malaysia flights over APD - ttglive (http://www.ttglive.com/c/portal/layout?p_l_id=3208370&CMPI_SHARED_articleId=4376177&CMPI_SHARED_ImageArticleId=4376177&CMPI_SHARED_articleIdRelated=4376177&CMPI_SHARED_ToolsArticleId=4376177&CMPI_SHARED_CommentArticleId=4376177&articleTitle=Manchester%20loses)

[spannersatcx]

RE ANZ and indeed Cathay...

Is it possible the success of EK 380 plus the further planned 3rd daily is finally sparking airlines like Cathay into life as their forecast market share Ex London etc is "possibly" starting to erode ? Nope not Cathay.

Manchester loses Malaysia flights over APD - ttglive can't see what differrence that makes as it's the pax that pay the tax not the airline!

[MUFC_fan]

can't see what differrence that makes as it's the pax that pay the tax not the airline!


You understand how a low cost airline works don't you?

[pwalhx]

Seems not and also probably never listens to Mr. O'Leary's pronouncements

[wanna_be_there]

Quoting spannesatcx
Nope not Cathay

Hmm, I dont Know? CX are going to launch at least 2 new destinations next year.
CX themselves have said they want to tap into unmet demand, and Id expect 138000 pax, with at least 40000 of those pax being MAN-HKG O&D traffic, Id say that is deffinatly unmet demand!

I dont know what your guy higher up the tree is telling you spanners, but is it possible he is not telling the truth thus to avoid leakage of information of a possible route? (Im not saying your not trusted, but usually only specific people in a company are told of this kind of info to protect confidentiality)

End of the day, there may be no chance of a CX route, but they tried in 2006 but were stopped by red tape. Maybe they want to try again? Cargo does well so a pax route offset by cargo could possibly be a low risk venture.

[DomyDom]

Anybody have any rumours as to what the new 'niche' BMIbaby routes from MAN will be for summer 2011? Thanks, DomyDom:confused:

[Gordon_uk3]

Has the third daily Emirates rotation been confirmed and if so do we have times and flight numbers

Thanks

[aeulad]

Would Hong Kong Airlines with their 332 not be more of a Manchester Hong Kong potential? They have launched Europe flights recently. Same with Bangkok Airways and Bangkok when they get their 350s.

Regards

Mike

[wanna_be_there]

Has the third daily Emirates rotation been confirmed and if so do we have times and flight numbers

Not announced yet, but shoulf be up and running by March 11. No definate times yet.


Would Hong Kong Airlines with their 332 not be more of a Manchester Hong Kong potential? They have launched Europe flights recently

Hong Kong airlines is owned by Hanian, and thus far seem to have avoided MAN. They had a press statement once saying they didnt want to go where there was a lot of competition, hence routes like BRU.
MAN, therefore with no direct competition, could feature in a future plan.

[wanna_be_there]

Air Malta cutting down to 5 weekly next year:

Air Malta cuts 11 UK flights for summer, as Budget inflicts 2% VAT rise on tourist beds | MaltaToday (http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/air-malta-cuts-11-uk-flights-for-summer-as-budget-inflicts-2-vat-rise-on-tourist-beds)

I would say Easyjet are having an affect but they are cutting flights across the board in the UK.

[Trash_Hauler]

ILS calibrators in late this evening... if you ever want to see a KingAir put through it's paces, it's well worth a watch!

[Scottie Dog]

WINTER 10/11 MODIFIED SNOWPLAN

Last winter there was a lot of complaining on various aviation websites with regards to the planning and action undertaken by Manchester Airport when snow hit the airport.

As the winter once again rears it's ugly face I thought you would be interested in the following link:

http://www.magworld.co.uk/magweb.nsf...perations+Plan+10-11+Draft+pdf.pdf

It would appear that some lessons have been learned and I hope that the increase in staffing levels will allow for a better response to whatever snow/ice we may have.

[BHX5DME]

Pax - 1,648,189 up 1.99%

Movements - 14,584 down 1.78%

Freight - 10,933 up 4.18%

Pax rolling 12 months down 6.87%

[dh dragon]

No posts between 28/10 and today ! is everybody on holiday ?

[Hamburg 2K8]

I'm not on holiday dh dragon. Not until December 10th at least when I'm off to Hamburg for a weekend in the company of Easyjet.

Anyway, good news about the passengers being up for Oct. Take it the EK A380 loads are continuing to do well?!

I know this is not a Lufthansa thread but can anyone clear up a couple of questions I have as I fly with them about 10 times a year on business and would like some info please.

*Is Hamburg being operated by a CRJ700 all year round now?
*Have the Stuggart loads not been up to expectations, hence the downgrade to CRJ200? or is that just because winter's here?
*And will we be getting extra Frankfurt and Munich flights from next year? I believ this would bring them up to 5 daily (FRA) and 4 daily (MUC)?

[Hamburg 2K8]

Also, scottie dog thanks for the link, but it doesn't seem to be working for me, I get page cannot be found message. Someone on airlines.net also posted the same link and no luck with that either. Can you tell me where it is located on the MAN website?
Thanks!

[Suzeman]

Try here

http://www.magworld.co.uk/magweb.nsf/Content/AirOpsDLWinterOpsPlan

Found by using the MAG WORLD search engine.....

Suzeman

[Hamburg 2K8]

Thanks Suzeman, it worked that time. A bit of bedtime reading I think.

[Suzeman]

So now you know.....

Manchester Airport switching off escalators in eco-drive - Manchester Evening News (http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1364840_manchester_airport_switching_off_escalators_in_ecodr ive)

No more complaints please :E

Suzeman

[doublesix]

Ah, now I know why the travelators on Pier C have not been working when I have passed through the airport for the last two years:E

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Would it not ultimately save far more energy (and inconvenience users less) to fit sensors to all the escalators and travelators at MAN, as one sees at German airports. When a person steps on them, they activate; when no user is detected they switch themselves off again. Energy usage is optimized and the job still gets done. Is this just too simple for MAN?

[MAN OPS]

Virgin Atlantic are to have their own exec. lounge at T2.

Work starts on construction in about 2 weeks and will be located above where the T2 duty free is.

[parky747]

Virgin Atlantic are to have their own exec. lounge at T2.

Interesting VS are doing this! Could this mean VS have further plans for MAN ops???

[roverman]

Next year they are launching StalyVegas to Las Vegas. Probably not a great deal of Upper Class on that one, but there will be two VS flights ex-MAN each day, every day from next Spring. The lounge sounds like a vote of confidence. They may well have bigger plans for the future. Bring it on!

[spannersatcx]

as the 330 operating the VS75 is a single class config then there probably won't be upperclass at all then!:eek:

[2J&D]

I believe that they are looking at a new Upper Class seat for the A330 so although the flights are loaded in the system, you are unable to book Upper yet...Def showing Premium Economy as well as standard Econ, so will not just be all Y class config.

[wanna_be_there]

as the 330 operating the VS75 is a single class config then there probably won't be upperclass at all then!

And dont forget the second MCO, BGI and LAS are all on the B744, so all is not lost for upper class pax....

Also, they may be building a V-room, which is an optional extra available to all Virgin Holiday pax.

[Tight Seat]

The 330 will have PE product too.

[Skipness One Echo]

I believe that they are looking at a new Upper Class seat for the A330 so although the flights are loaded in the system, you are unable to book Upper yet...Def showing Premium Economy as well as standard Econ, so will not just be all Y class config.

Current A330 plans :
LGW / MAN Beach fleet gets Economy and Premium Economy mix.
Heathrow fleet also gets the new Upper Class suite.

[superspotter]

Manchester Airport management are Pathetic.
Why do they continue to treat the public like pre-school children??
I refer to the spurious "eco-drive" announcement regarding the shutting down of a couple of escalators. So instead of a working escalator, we are met with the incredulous statement:- “Turning off this escalator for 12 months saves enough energy to make five million cups of tea.”
Bullsh*t. Why dont they just tell the truth? "Turning of this escalator for 12 months saves enough cash thereby increasing the shareholders coffers"?
It has absolutely nothing to do with any perceived "eco-drive". If they were serious about an economy drive, they could quite easily and permanently close the second runway as it is simply not needed, period.
They continue to keep it open for a couple of hours either end of the day in order to keep up the pretence that it is needed, pah!
Yours sincerely V. Meldrew.

[easyflyer83]

Waiting to depart on a morning when just one runway is in operation I can tell you it is needed at those times.

[Ringwayman]

2nd runway is still needed but the flexible opening hours is useful to pacify the locals until such times that extended/permanent opening from 0630 to 2200 is needed. In a very idle moment, I looked at all the scheduled services on a Monday morning just to see what kind of connecting opportunities exist - there are some 98 scheduled service movements from 0630 to 0930; 44 of them between 0800 and 0859. Add in the charters and you can see where the need arises for the 2nd runway. Having said that, they may be able to cope with 50 movements on 1 runway but I'd prefer it to pegged at about 44 an hour maximum.

[superspotter]

OK, I apologise. My rant wasnt really about the second runway, I was all for it when it was proposed but really, it's hardly needed. No, my rant was more about the stupid analogies we are fed i.e. the one regarding the escalators or ones like such and such a building is equal to 52.5 football pitches or such and such a ship is as long as 329 london buses.....you get the idea!!
Why cant they treat as as adults and tell us how big it is rather than dumbing it down and equating it to some stupid analogy??

[ZOOKER]

In 1995, the plan was for R2, (Runway 2), to be open 0620-2200 Local.
The total volume of Kerosene which has been wasted due to its non-availabilty, (extended routings/holding etc) is a bloody disgrace, especially coming from a local-council type organization which claims to be so environmentally aware.

[Ringwayman]

But, ironically, it's the local council (Macclesfield) that have decided the only way they'd accept the 2nd runway is if the resident's environment has to be protected from "too much noise pollution" hence the restrictions put in place, so any harm caused by excessive CO2 and fuel burn should be placed straight at that council.

[ZOOKER]

Superspotter,
turning off that escalator is a great idea.
It saves a great amount of Jet A1.
It's non-availability causes fat businessmen and overweight chavs (the airport's predominant clientele) to climb stairs, therefore losing body-mass.
Over 12 months these little weight losses all add up to reduced take-off weights. :ok:
Turn off the moving walkways too. In fact, remove them completely.
Have another cup of tea! :E

[ZOOKER]

Ringwayman.
Due to advances in engine technology, EGCC creates less noise with 2 runways than it did 20 years ago with one. Macclesfield is ony affected by noise in that if R2 was open more often, there would be less holding at DAYNE, and more expeditious 05L climb profiles.

[superspotter]

Maybe they should close half of all the check-in desks too and save on the wear and tear of the conveyor belts.........oh, they already do that :E

[biddedout]

My eyes rolled when i saw that smug notice attached to an escalator. If they really gave a toss about environmental isses, they would have installed solar water heaters (yes they do work on cloudy days) on all that south facing roof space. Problem is that would involve long term investment with payback over several years and the beancounters are not too keen on that.

Also, what is the point of pretending to save the planet when they sell hundreds of thousands of plastic security bags in round plastic containers which go straight in the bin. :=