MANCHESTER - 8

[Suzeman]

Sure I saw someone start the new MAN thread but it seems to have disappeared...:ooh:

Anyway, anyone heard of plans to use some of the aircraft Apron in the NW corner for car parking this summer? :eek:

If so, what is the reason and is this permanent or temporary?

Suzeman

[Trash_Hauler]

Heard there is a plan to relocate staff west to the apron either up in the corner or to the end of T2... Either way, i am certain that MAPLC will make a complete and utter bollocks of it!

[viscount702]

Its permanent.

Seems MAPLC needs more room to park cars and less to park planes.

The details can be found on the MAG website in the document library under airfield directives.

[All names taken]

Re: Pier B discussion from Thread 7

Having just read some of the negative comments about Pier B, I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with them. As a regular user of T1 the Pier B experience is horrible, particularly on arrival. Actually for what is claimed to be one of Europe's leading airports and by far the biggest UK airport outside London, it's just embarrassing. To the first time visitor, god only knows what image it first portrays of Manchester and of England.

However, many of the negative comments were related to Passport Control. There is nothing MAPlc can do about the queues or staffing levels there or about the extent of checks and the time they take. Those that complain about this cannot be regular flyers otherwise they would have registered for Iris or increasingly will have got themselves a scannable passport that can be used at the e border. I'm lucky - I have both and trust me it takes me seconds to go through Passport Control in T1 with those two options at my disposal. In June on a Lufthansa flight, I timed touchdown on Runway 1 to parking on Stand 23 and out to the station concourse in 21 minutes - ok I was in Row 1, no bags and I'm a fast walker but that is an incredible result.
But this misses the point about the rest of the arrival experience, the whole place is depressing and drags you down. Where ever you've been, arriving at T1 MAN, it still feels down at heel - I won't use the words 'Third World' which many on here often do - it isn't - but certainly some of the less wealthy parts of Eastern Europe spring readily to mind.

With the arrival of the A380 and F class soon and them using Pier B, I find it quite incredible that Emirates have allowed it to happen. They already use T2 which is functional (despite all the clutter)and works well with large modern airliners because it was designed for them. Pier B was designed for Vickers Viscounts et al. I would, if I were to pay First Class fares, expect the whole experience to be much better than Pier B albeit with the future promise of a lick of emulsion and new carpet tiles. Stand 15 is also one heck of a trek from the lounges.
Demolition seems the only credible choice. The fact is: Pier B is disfunctional, anachronistic and not fit for purpose.

PS: Pier C is not a whole lot better btw

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Hi Suzeman,

Yes, I originally started a new MANCHESTER - 8 thread. However, I deleted it when I noticed that the software interface between my IMAC and the PPRuNe website had converted my capital letters to lower case. It all looked a bit naff so I got rid. I have noticed before that text inserted in the 'title' box converts itself to lower case; very frustrating!

SHED.

[Skipness One Echo]

Designed before the Government knee jerked and decided arriving international passengers were much to dangerous to come into contact with departing international passengers. Why is that? Doesn't seem to worry them one whit at AMS, GVA et al?

Can someone link to the reason?

Apparently this utterly threw the passenger flows at the then new North Terminal at LGW.... My laboured point being that older terminals where this is still an issue and predate the ruling, T1 International , all of T2 and one remaining pier T3 at LHR are the obvious ones I use, are being bulldozed slowly bit by bit and replaced. Glasgow's old international pier is of the same layout and age and is now reduced to handling easyJet and Loganair traffic.

Might it have been a better capital investment plan to refit the terminals rather than pour the concrete for that second runway? These investments have a rather long lead time, and any demolition and rebuild would mean moving the A380 ops to where? Has the arrival of the A380 perhaps delayed the necessary reuild

[Ringwayman]

Following on from the previously mentioned Icelandair incerase to 5 weekly from 14th September to the 26th October, they've revealed that they will be at 5 weekly from 12th April to 6th June.

[Suzeman]

Yes, I originally started a new MANCHESTER - 8 thread. However, I deleted it when I noticed that the software interface between my IMAC and the PPRuNe website had converted my capital letters to lower case.

Ah good Mr Shed - glad I wasn't imagining it - hadn't been to the pub by then! :) As you can see, it has done the same to my capital letters too, but then my standards are lower, so I pressed on!

Thanks Viscount for the link to the MAG website. Seems like the car park on the stands is at least longish term as the AD quotes "until further notice" and the change will eventually be incorporated in the Aerodrome Manual. Looks like it should be possible to reverse this though at reasonably short notice if needed.

The question is - if the stands are currently not needed for aircraft because there isn't demand and pax numbers are way down, where are all the cars coming from?

And I note that T2 pier served stands are being rearranged so that there are less MARS stands, although I guess there are a fair number of wide bodies on there now all through the day, so it practice it probably doen't make much difference to actual capacity.

Less stands is bad news though for all the potential diversions this winter :}

Skippy
Designed before the Government knee jerked and decided arriving international passengers were much to dangerous to come into contact with departing international passengers. Why is that?

The issue of segregation of inbound /outbound in the UK has been going on for 30 years now. The story I heard about LGW North was that the powers that be in BAA decided to plough on with their new development in the 1980s with mixing of passengers despite the UK DOT or whatever it was called at the time suggesting that this was not acceptable. DOT's argument was (and probably still is) that inbound passengers may not have been screened at their departure airport to the same high UK standards and there is therefore a possibility of some collusion between inbound and outbound pax transferring weapons or whatever. The end result should be that everyone in the restricted zone of the terminal is screened to UK standards, not the standard of some other countries.

Anyway, the end result of this BAA defiance at LGW North was they were forced to segregate at the gate by means of a perimeter corridor for inbounds with consequent delays to boarding or unloading as no boarding could take place when inbound pax were in the corridor and vv - rather like the south side of MAN's Pier C now.

Existing developments in the UK at the time were exempt and pressure from the airports not to spend money on this kept it that way until 9/11 although monitoring of the mixing areas was increased. After 9/11 MAN was obliged to segregate its old piers in a very short space of time as there was not enough space in the piers for segregated gate lounges with security and this resulted in the mish mash of routes you enjoy today!

I presume from your comments that there are still mixing areas at LHR - not been through there for so long now thank goodness so I don't know. I presume that security screening is done in a cordoned off gate lounge immediately before boarding in these areas and once through the screening there is no contact with inbound pax?

Incidentally, doesn't AMS do gate lounge security immediately before boarding after which there is no mixing? And at GVA when I was last there a few months ago the flows were certainly segregated on the piers.


Might it have been a better capital investment plan to refit the terminals rather than pour the concrete for that second runway?

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.....In the 1990s slots at prime times at MAN were in short supply and a couple of airlines didn't start as they couldn't get anywhere near the times they wanted despite single runway capacity being declared at 50+ /hour in some hours. A runway was what was needed at the time and in those days a runway had longer lead times due to the planning process. And nobody else had built one for 20+years at the time (before that was EDI?) so it was a step in the dark for everyone.

The increased scheduling limits were used in peak hours as soon as the runway opened. Since then the world has changed dramatically but who could have predicted it then? The next stage of work after the runway opened was to move onto the terminals and expand them rather than refurbish. It didn't happen for obvious reasons and only recently did they finally start to get to grips with them.

With the lower throughput figures, the good news is that it is of course easier to refurb and alter an operational terminal. The bad news is that revenues are inevitablty down so how can you afford it? Oh to be an airport manager these days :eek:

Suzeman

EDIT: Title now sorted!

[Adola69]

Apparently the car parking issue isn't capacity driven, but commercially driven, (from the top) as the the Stands that are being converted to car-parking will be for the " VALET " service. I hear that £10 a day per car has been mentioned. Drop your car off at the Valet reception, hand your keys over and off you go.
Your car will be parked on a tip top surface!!!
I suppose the maths are quite simple and if there's a sudden increase in the number of stands required then they can fairly quickly be brought back to service again.
However if you were a passenger who had just completed an Ocean crossing and arrived at Man a tad early due to favourable winds en-route, you'd be pretty hacked off if you had to sit around on the ground for 40 or 50 mins awaiting a stand (which happens all too regularly at the moment with no stand closures!)? Yes I know it's sometimes the Airlines that request the a/c to be held as they want to Gate it on an air bridged stand, but hells teeth, no stands because they are car-parks!:{
However this is not a new idea, as MA regularly take stands out of service to park snow clearing vehicles on them, or Fuel bowsers (Stand 64 & 65).
Why don't we go one better and make Runway 2 into the Valet parking area or even turn into a racing circuit as it appears to be damn all use for 80% of the time.:(
So lets hear it for the joined-up thinking team of MA ------ (silence!!):ugh:

[Trash_Hauler]

As for the car parks... I find it laughable that the apron is being converted for valet parking. Contrary to popular belief, Staff West is not free. The companies have to pay for their staff members to park there. But once again, MAPLC craps all over the staff by making us park in a car park that simply is not fit for purpose. There are potholes the size of the Grand Canyon all over the damned place... hell, my car has been damaged there... unnecessary speed bumps, not enough convenient parking and the whole area is very poorly lit. I will simply not allow my female members of staff to walk around there after dark. I take one of the ramp vehicles and give them a lift so at least I know that none of them have been robbed or raped. The Wythenshawe Massive do lurk about in there at night! Perhaps the PLC should consider the "new" parking areas for use by staff rather than SLF. We are the ones who have to park at this hell hole of an airport every day!

Just a thought.

[wanna_be_there]

Just a slight change to its schedule, the Emirates A380 on 1st september has been given an extended ground time for its first flight, presumably for promotional tours etc.

EK17 lands at 12:25, and EK18 usually departs at 14:10, but for 1st september, EK18 will depart at 15:20.

I think this recent schedule change puts to bed any rumours that the first A380 will be delayed by a week.

[HXdave]

RE: EK A380, can't wait for her to come in. i'm pulling as many strings as possible to get a very very good view of the aircraft, and if they are now thinking of doing promotional tours 'inside', i think i'm gonna have to pull a few more strings............ lol

[750XL]

£36 a month for Staff West I believe, and some companies make staff pay for their own parking!

:ugh:

[mantug01]

The extra 75 mins is for press & PR and the Emirates VIP's.

No 'unapproved' airport staff will be allowed near the aircraft. There is an airside bulletin shortly advising all airside staff to only view from designated points.

[Trash_Hauler]

We couldn't have the 'great unwashed' airport staff sullying up the photo ops now could we. Typical of MAN's disdain for the staff that keep winning them bloody awards! Besides, most of the folks that I know that are gonna be dealing with this behemoth aren't exactly looking forward to the 'experience'.

[crewmeal]

No 'unapproved' airport staff will be allowed near the aircraft. There is an airside bulletin shortly advising all airside staff to only view from designated points.

Who or what are unapproved staff I wonder!!

[spannersatcx]

I doubt whether the 'unapproved' staff give a $%^& it's an aeroplane not exactly something to get all excited about!:yuk:

[roverman]

Hardly suprising, and completely understandable that there might be restricted access to the aircraft on 1st September. This almost certainly will be the first ever visit by the type to MAN, arriving on a scheduled service at a totally rebuilt stand with new facilities. All other A380 destination airports have had the benefit of an operational trial, ZRH had the aircraft there for 3 whole days at the insistence of the Swiss CAA. To give all those staff involved in the successful first turnaround a fighting chance of getting it back out on time, the last thing they need is throngs of sightseers. Simple as that. The A380 will be a daily event, plenty of opportunities to have a look around in due course.

[wanna_be_there]

The A380 will be a daily event, plenty of opportunities to have a look around in due course.

Exactly. I know its exciting, but dont panic of no-one gets up close and personal on the its first flight, Its going to be at MAN every single day from 1st september. Its not a one off so Im sure everyone will get their chance to see.
Personally, Id rather non essential bystanders stay away and let the staff turn it around in the quickest possible time, and send it off with no delay. Lets show the world what MAN is made of and have a perfect turn around without having 'familiarisation days' and numerous tests. :ok:

[BHX5DME]

BHX held a similar day when A6-EDE came in 12 months ago, it all went very smoothly.

I hope the Manchester event goes as well !

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/banad/photos/album/1273319075/pic/733624938/view?picmode=&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&count=20&dir=asc

[Suzeman]

I doubt whether the 'unapproved' staff give a $%^& it's an aeroplane not exactly something to get all excited about!http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/pukey.gif


If you are correct, this is a terrible indictment of the business today. This is an iconic aircraft in the mould of the 747 and Concorde. I would hope as many people as possible who work at the airport would be enthusiastic about it and want to look at it and know more about it. It certainly used to be the case. And I'm sure there will be lots of the public at and around the airport to see it.

I realise of course that it is an operational aircraft and access needs to be restricted. Pity that a test flight is not being made first so that more people could have a closer look.

Suzeman

[chiglet]

MAN an "approved 'future' destination" got a "flyby".
BHX for an "anniversary" got a 'full visit'
Says a lot......
Will the AHS run out of tissiues? :zzz:

[Tight Seat]

Not got problem with this new car park ( staff west) on stand. Would love to bring the bus onto 22 and have the family waggon waiting! Save the maze of fortune in T1.

[MAN777]

My bet is on double daily A380 before the year is out so plenty of time to gaze at it :)

[Mr A Tis]

Well, I would have tried the new girl out in October on my MAN-SIN trip. However, a J class ticket was twice the price of Lufthansa. So, gonna settle for a A319 + A343 without the stupid o clock plane change. If that's typical pricing (I may have been unlucky) then I can't see them filling 2 x A380s a day.

[Bagso]

Re Emirates Pricing

On a theme, a work colleagues based near MAN is on way to Maldives Mid Aug, but was staggered to find out he is going out and returning via LGW.

The LGW flight was £1000 cheaper than MAN on same day same return date......:ugh:

...does it ever work the other way where flights are cheaper EX MAN than London ?

[Skipness One Echo]

My bet is on double daily A380 before the year is out so plenty of time to gaze at it

Your eyes will bleed if you do. I am looking forward to trying the A380 LHR-CDG-LHR next week but it really struggles to *look* good. Better looking from the inside out I think. Trust me, by Christmas you'll all be wondering what on Earth the fuss was about and getting back to gazing at better looking aircraft.

...does it ever work the other way where flights are cheaper EX MAN than London ?

In theory the many more London pax pay willing to pay more on business trips subsidise the Y pax who pay can less on leisure fares. That's one of the benefits of a really big hub operation.
In theory.

[wanna_be_there]

If that's typical pricing (I may have been unlucky) then I can't see them filling 2 x A380s a day.

Well, its just over a month until the A388 kicks in, and if they are still charging this, to me it seems a good sign that people are paying it. When they have to start heavily reducing the J/F class fares, then we should worry.

Also, the problem with 2 A380s is not so much pax, as I habe no doubt EK could easily fill 2 of those things from MAN, but their issue would be cargo.
EK have already stated cargo has taken a huge hit thanks to the A380, and putting 2 A380s on would kill them. EY/QR would soon jump on that oppertunity, as QR are already studying B773 ops at MAN to try and take some of the displaced EK cargo.

[mantug01]

The A380 is only adding an extra 70+ plus pax, it will be full most days. Give it a few months or within a year then they will make up the extra pax and cargo on an extra AM B773.

[Hamburg 2K8]

Went to Dublin yesterday for a business trip, flew with FR and all was ok.

Anyway, stand 09 going out and I noticed that Pier B is blocked off after Stand 11. Carpet has been taken up in the arrivals side and re-decorating is also taking place, the only thing different from the departures end is the mobile air con units and the usual leaking celings and stained carpet. So the gate 12 area will be after gate 11 and from the outside (when l was boarding and later yesterday de-boarding my FR flight) it looked quite a big gate area which also looked like it was being re-decorated, I hope to god it's tiled flooring and not carpet again! So the grey extension at the end of Pier B is what exatley? I take it the airbridges will connect the this? Pier B was very busy yesterday when I was there, 4 Jet 2 flights, 4 Monarch flights, Aer Lingus flight and my Ryanair flight, so how will it cope with the Dubai A380 flights? Also, hear EK will be using Stand 12 for the evening 777 flight too?
Come on MAN, Pier B needs re-placeing now! I did see an artists impression of what the new Pier B might look like but can't find it now, anyone have this link? It surley needs to be much higher, wider and longer than it is now?
Could Peir B go any longer? Wouldn't it block taxiways towards 23R/05L? If there will be 2 levels, then the height must be important and well as width, if MAN wants the current T2 transalantic flights to use T1, then Pier B is no way near as capable at the moment.
Pier C is better but still in need of a lot of work, new flooring, esclators and bigger seating areas at gates if the "bigger" flights are to use T1 in the future.
And finally I'm confused with the gating numbers on Pier B - noticed stand 12 has 12L, 12 & 12R. We have Stands 10 & 11 either side of these, but were are 13 & 14? I also see stand 15 is next to 12R? Anyone clarify?

Right, long rant over, comments more than welcome.

[Flyboy543]

If you look at the ground chart from NATS dated 10 May 10:

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadbasic/pamslight-F2B345625D4E9735E0B1399B853E356D/7FE5QZZF3FXUS/EN/Charts/AD/AIRAC/EG_AD_2_EGCC_2-2_en_2010-07-29.pdf

You'll see there is no stand 14 to keep either side of the stand odd/even. There is no stand 13 (or gate 13) at any UK airport so not that likely to find one at MAN.

Regards

[DOOBIE]

Flyboy

I'm not sure about gate numbers, but Luton has a stand 13, and so do.....
Gatwick, Stansted, Birmingham, Newcastle......

[Adola69]

I am told that when ever an A.380 is parked on stand 12, Stands 8,9,10,11, and 15 will close for use by pax.
That's not to say a/c will not be parked on them during this time, but only if they are not going to require to de-plane or load-up any pax.
By doing this the Emirates punters will have almost half of Pier B to themselves, - it just doesn't get much better than that does it !!!!!:oh:

[Rob Courtney]

Passed in and out of T3 this week (first time for a while) and am still impressed with the speed of security there from dropping my bag to sitting in the bar took no more than 10 mins.
The low number gates, although a bit of a walk work well and are clean and tidy.
On return, from landing through to collecting my bag and getting in the car was no more than 20 mins so:ok:

Am going through T1 next week so will have to wait and see.

One question though I travelled Tuesday morning and had expected to see departing aircraft using 23L but the airport seemed to be running single runway despite being busy. Apologies if its been discussed earlier.

Rob

[aidoair]

I agree that the convienience of T3 is still there. Whilst security has been upgraded and is much more bright and modern, once in the departure lounge it is now starting to show its age and in need of a little spruce up (at least it was 2 month ago when i last passed through T3).

Are there any immediate plans for an overhaul of this part of T3? I know once T1 was almost complete they were to focus on T2, so i'm guessing it won't be too long for T3 to get a lick of paint at least?...

[conti onepass]

whats up with the DL155 2day, it has not left manchester yet

[Ringwayman]

The replacement for the one that didn't arrive this morning landed a few minutes ago. Don't know what's up with the original aircraft though, but am surprised they've flown a replacement aircaft in and not looked at rebooking pax on to KL/AF routing through AMS & CDG.

[750XL]

Crew were out of hours last I heard.

[pennineuk]

T3 is a mess these days, since they moved security. Having lived in the NW for 30 years I know the airport well, but for occasional travellers, navigating from T3 security to the main lounge is horrible, with poor signage and no obvious routes....a bit like parts of NCL. T3 needs more than a coat of paint!

[conti onepass]

ok cheers guys hope they were weel looked after, i got delayed 8 hours on thomsons the other week, and to be honest was bored sxxtless having to wait in terminal 2

[750XL]

ok cheers guys hope they were weel looked after, i got delayed 8 hours on thomsons the other week, and to be honest was bored sxxtless having to wait in terminal 2

Recently TOM have been escorting pax over to the SAS Radisson for food on such long delays.

[Trash_Hauler]

Looks like the Car Park Madness game is now in full effect. Spoke to one of the bus drivers on the way in this morning and he tells me that the car parks folks expect that the apron parking spots will be full by lunchtime today and that the remaining overflows for passenger parking will be full not long after that. With the apron and overflows filled, they still expect an excess of passenger cars (based on pre bookings) to be 'a couple of THOUSAND'! Where are they planning on putting these couple of thousand excess cars? You guessed it folks... STAFF WEST! Should be fun for those coming into work over the next several days! I know that my employment contract states that the company pays for my car parking. If there is nowhere to park, guess i will just park up in the multi story. See if the company will pay for that!

I dont know why they dont just close down all the stands along the back row on November. There's sod all parking there anyways. Besides, we would look like a busy airport again with all the night stoppers on contact stands!

[IB4138]

Don't forget that the large Airparks facility at Handforth Dean has now ceased trading, so the cars that were booked for "their holiday stay" there have had to find somewhere to go.

Brakes put on airport drivers as car park closes - Manchester Evening News (http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1246505_brakes_put_on_airport_drivers_as_car_park_closes)

[750XL]

Where are they planning on putting these couple of thousand excess cars? You guessed it folks... STAFF WEST! Should be fun for those coming into work over the next several days! I know that my employment contract states that the company pays for my car parking. If there is nowhere to park, guess i will just park up in the multi story. See if the company will pay for that!

So where are staff expected to park now?

Area 7 is almost always full (and you/the company has to pay extra for it) and recently Staff West has started to look very full early in the mornings, along with the staff bus!

I'd imagine they'll use the smaller section of Staff West where they cut a big hole in the fence a few days ago for pax parking if that's the case :{

[Trash_Hauler]

As I understand it... THey are gonna send pax to staff west.. to hell with the staff.

[pwalhx]

T3 is a mess these days, since they moved security. Having lived in the NW for 30 years I know the airport well, but for occasional travellers, navigating from T3 security to the main lounge is horrible, with poor signage and no obvious routes....a bit like parts of NCL. T3 needs more than a coat of paint!

It is one corridor what is so confusing, yes T3 needs a make over but lets not get carried away. I ws told earlier in the year that the improvement plans had been delayed by the recession, which is perfectly understandable.

[CabinCrewe]

I am seasoned traveller but visited for the first time last month and wondered up and down trying to find my way about. Wasnt impressed.

[MAN777]

A quick glance at the new "airside" parking at T2, A conservative estimate of spaces I would say 300+

300 x £30 a week = £9000 a week !!!!!:hmm:

Surely that more profitable than parking out of work airliners ? Although the security fencing must have cost a fortune.

[750XL]

Although the security fencing must have cost a fortune.

Hope your being sarcastic :}

Few concrete blocks with a bit of chain link and some spikey barbed wire :8

[OltonPete]

Profits down 28% at Manchester Airports Group : Manchester Airport News Stories (http://www.uk-airport-news.info/manchester-airport-news-310710.html)

Any comments on these?

Seem pretty good considering the general state of UK aviation in the
last year or so.

Pete

[Bagso]

Re MAG Profits...

Sorry to be idle but do we have the split of which airports made a profit /Loss ....?

[UnderASouthernSky]

I have been told by a member of MAG that a T3 overhaul of facilities, signage and access after security will start quite soon for the remainder of the year.
She also told me that Apron parking is for valet parking overflow only, and not accessible to regular cars or staff. The car park congestion is apparently due to a push by the airport to sell it's own services - which have proved very popular - and the demise of several outside firms... Airparks especially.

[BRAKES HOT]

anyone know what the deal is with the two white tails parked up in the corner (75's I think)?

[oceanhawk]

I think they are registered to Thomson.

[Manchester Kurt]

Tram link to the airport is confirmed.

Will be a 12min service (5 trams per hour) like the Eccles line is at present.

Not intended for connecting the airport to the city centre, rather the places along the line to each other, especially large parts of South Manchester which currently have no rail connections.

This line is being entirely funded locally and has no dependencies upon Whitehall for funding hence the green light in the current economic situation.

Greater Manchester Transport fund is paying.

GMPTE.com - GMPTE (http://www.gmpte.com/2009_news.cfm?news_id=9004272?submenuheader=3)

[Manchester Kurt]

Airport workers to get consession travel on Metrolink when it reaches the airport.

Myebook - Manchester Matters (http://www.myebook.com/ebook_viewer.php?ebookId=45360)

[BHX5DME]

Pax - 2,023,295 down 1.22%

Movements - 15,922 down 3.34%

Freight - 10,737 up 24.82%

12m Pax up to 31.07.10 - 17,889,811 down 9.67%

[Tight Seat]

Is it true a Virgin lass got knocked down in Staff West the other day?

[750XL]

Staff west is a complete joke.

Taking longer and longer to get in there each day and theres becoming less and less parking spaces, even those right in the top corner near the cargo center are starting to be used!

Apparently staff will be able to use the first set of barriers which is currently only used by the busses, like we used to be able to when we had a proper car park :ok:

Overheard two people on the bus the other morning talking about the state of the car parks and one of them said he'd wrote an email, and received no reply from MAG. I'll be emailing them shortly and it's probably best if more do so too :ok:

Car Park Administration
Tel: 0161 489 2020
Fax: 0161 489 3555
Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]

[Mr @ Spotty M]

If you think you have a Health & Safety issue and the airport is ignoring it, contact the Health and Safety Executive at Grove House, Skerton Road, Manchester, M16 0RB, Fax: 0161 952 8222.:ok:

[spharrison]

What news about FlyBe any more routes out off Man next year and BiBaby got some news routes too ?

[davemfi]

In response to the A380 queries, the first flight is still confirmed as Wed 1st September. Although a 'small snag,' is the delivery of the No: 2 airbridge which will service the upper deck. According to a very good source within the planning team, this isn't due to be delivered to the airport site until very, very late August (Best estimate at the moment!.)

To add to this, even though the 1st flight is the 1st of September, the 'inaugural' flight is, I believe, Saturday 4th September.

Emirates, together with MAG, have decided to invite the regions'/countries'/worlds' press to the 'inaugural' flight 3 days after the 1st flight so as to hopefully iron out any problems that may occur during the first 3 turnarounds and to hopefully have a few less hanger-on-ers around and about. we'll see.

[750XL]

Airbridges are still on their way from China via ship apparently :8

[spannersatcx]

Just heard a rumour that QANTAS are starting back at MAN, anybody know anything?

[horatio_b]

I think there is a Qantas flight due in next Sunday, 15/8,
arriving 1750 en route LHR-SYD

[wanna_be_there]

Just heard a rumour that QANTAS are starting back at MAN, anybody know anything?

Might be them getting confused with our yearly QF2 service which is due on sunday. Unlike other years though, the QF2 is originating at MAN and not LHR.

However, Jetstar are getting B787's and we are apparently 1st or 2nd on the list of European destinations due to start when the B787's come online. The other 1st or 2nd is AMS

Although a 'small snag,' is the delivery of the No: 2 airbridge which will service the upper deck. According to a very good source within the planning team, this isn't due to be delivered to the airport site until very, very late August

Im getting a bit worried about this gate fiasco. Typical UK planning, do everything at the last minute and find the cheapest alternative possible. If that 2nd jetbridge is installed by 1st september Id be very very surprised. If the actual structure is not due to arrive until end of August, its will be another week at least before its installed and tested.
Dont forget, the upper deck is the F/J deck, so I dont think EK are going to be too amused by this!

Good on you MAG, lets give the world a perfect example of how to p:mad:s of your best customer :ugh:

[Hamburg 2K8]

I bloody knew something wouldn't be ready, didn't think it would be a delay of one of the airbridge's though. So is the first one attached yet? How's the re-decorating going in Pier B? I was in Pier B two weeks ago and then it seems to be the arrivals side that was being done, departures still looked terrible. Please, Please get rid of that horrible carpet and dirty old style windows on the western side were gates 4, 6, 8 & 10 are, gate 2 seems to look more modern from the outside, why was this updated only?

I don't quite get the Pier B extension, after gate 11 in Pier B, what were gates 12 & and the old gate 15, there seems to be plenty of space for the A380 passengers then there is a grey/silver extension attached to Pier B which is the new stand 12 and also has a new stand 15 next to stand 11 (confusing isn't the word) what is the grey/silver extension for if the passengers are going to be waiting at the end of Pier B for gate 12 boarding.

[mantug01]

Stand 12 Airbridge 1 will appear very very soon

[CabinCrew747]

Hey,

With regards to Qantas;

QF6022 is due from London at 18:50 on Sunday and is due to depart as QF0002 at 21:45 for Bangkok and Sydney. Aircraft is a 744 operating from T1.

CabinCrew747

[MUFC_fan]

MAN often seems to fall under the radar but I think EK's decision to launch the A380 from MAN plus EY and I believe QR not giving up but also increasing capacity may turn the heads of a few CEO's...

Would be great to see Jetstar in MAN.

I'll go down now and state: the 787 will be the saviour and making of Manchester Airport.

[mickyman]

MUFC_fan

'I'll go down now and state: the 787 will be the saviour and making of Manchester Airport'

As long as it delivers on costs 2 years + down the line.

MM

[Skipness One Echo]

I'll go down now and state: the 787 will be the saviour and making of Manchester Airport.

Given that's exactly what the B767 was supposed to do before the world retreated to Alliance hubs I seriously doubt it. Remember any Jetstar punter flying direct to MAN is one less flying QANTAS. Not for nothing did BA sell Go, competing against yourself is seldom successful.

What Jetstar marketing want and QANTAS management allow are not the same thing. You can have hub busting B787s at MAN or a fleet of A380s at LHR, unlikely you'll see both.

Exactly what do you want MAN saved from? Looking pretty good from where I am and looking forward to flying through again in a fortnight.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Skipness,

A Jetstar punter flying from Manchester is NOT one less flying QANTAS. It may be one less flying QF's competitors (EK, QR, EY, SQ etc.), but rarely QANTAS itself. The notoriously unreliable LHR Shuttle followed by a stressful transfer at Europe's worst major airport is an ordeal that most clued-up Northerners rejected long ago. Despite all the codeshares, BA MAN-LHR frequencies have eroded from 12x daily to 8x daily and most Shuttle flights are operated by A319/A320 versus B752/B763 ten years ago. That is because LHR connections are not attractive to us up here whether the OneLondon Alliance carriers like it or not. Their convenience is not our concern.

QANTAS have a simple choice. If they want to stick with LHR only that is fine; it is their commercial choice as a business and good luck to them. But if they seriously believe that those ex-LHR flights will attract MAN-originating pax to the full potential of the market then they are delusional. A Jetstar schedule from MAN is QANTAS' best prospect for making inroads into the Gulf carriers' dominance of the 'Kangaroo Route' from the North.

SHED.

[GrahamK]

The argument of using B757/763s on the shuttles 10 years ago, vs A320s nowadays, a lot of that has to come down to the improvements made in the railways, more and more people are choosing to take the train down to London from Manchester than fly, hence the smaller a/c ?

Of course, people are still using LHR as a transit point hence why I believe BA are adding an extra LHR rotation from MAN in place of a LGW flight from the winter schedules as well

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

GrahamK,

Your comment regarding domestic travel is valid but it does not invalidate my own point. The railways have made inroads into the Manchester-London market. However, the cutbacks in BA MAN-LHR Shuttles were evident well before the West Coast Main Line upgrade was completed. Returning to my point regarding Skipness' post, EK/EY/QR/SQ have established themselves as the carriers of choice on the 'Kangaroo Route' from the North. I'm sure that QANTAS themselves are well aware that their LHR transfers are significantly disadvantaged against these more reliable and superior* products.

* 'Superior' here refers not to onboard cabin service, but to the transfer experience at LHR and the notorious unreliability of the frequently cancelled MAN-LHR Shuttles.

SHED.

[The96er]

I believe BA are adding an extra LHR rotation from MAN in place of a LGW flight from the winter schedules as well

Ironically, the reason for adding an extra evening LHR shuttle during the winter is to cater for the increased transfer pax heading downunder for the southern hemisphere summer.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Well that's nice to know but me and mine will stick with EK via DXB, thanks!

[Curious Pax]

Only fly in the ointment with Jetstar appearing at MAN is that they seem to be planning on hubbing their flights towards Europe through Singapore. Given that MAN already has a service to Singapore I wouldn't be at all surprised if that moved us down the list.

With regard to the trains - just got back from a long weekend in London, and for the first time in probably 10 years went on the train. Just under 2 hours Stockport-Euston, for less than £90 return for 2 adults and a child, and unless your final destination is nearer LHR (or LGW) than the city centre then it's a no-brainer. Could have got it cheaper but only booked a couple of weeks ahead.

[Skipness One Echo]

Shed I agree with you, and if I were in Manchester I would not choose to fly all that way with two stops rather than one. However, airlines are not uniform bodies, companies can be quite competitive internally and the business case for the A380 and the SQUILLIONS of dollars that was spent on the hardware was to get as many peeps as possible on board QANTAS with good seat mile costs.

Jetstar was partially created to retain the QANTAS presence in markets they were unable to be competitive, this collides full on with the introduction of the A380 into London as this was bought to ensure QANTAS remains competitive in delivering armies of Aussies to it's Oneworld partners at the European end to connect onto their final destinations.

It's not that long ago that BA were booking people over LHR-JFK rather than the direct MAN-JFK service as it can depend on "whose" passengers they are within a company. It's barmy but it's true. MAN is better off with Emirates, Etihad and Qatar, but I feel many still pine for the old legacy days of the old flag carriers and will never admit it. Now that's also barmy but I do understand it.

[MUFC_fan]

Given that's exactly what the B767 was supposed to do before the world retreated to Alliance hubs I seriously doubt it. Remember any Jetstar punter flying direct to MAN is one less flying QANTAS.


The 767 is not as efficient as the 787 for obvious reasons. It is not fair to compare the aircraft by airline preferance over aircraft performance. Look at it this way: TOM are looking to fly to destinations such as Honolulu, Vietnam etc. - these would not have been possible with the 767.

As people have mentioned, flying Jetstar doesn't exactly mean moving over from Qantas. What a naive statement. What about EK, SQ, QR, EK, TK, AY or SK?


Not for nothing did BA sell Go, competing against yourself is seldom successful.


You mean like LH owning LX or BA owning EC? It all goes into the same pocket although they technically 'compete.'


You can have hub busting B787s at MAN or a fleet of A380s at LHR, unlikely you'll see both.


I somehow doubt that...


Despite all the codeshares, BA MAN-LHR frequencies have eroded from 12x daily to 8x daily and most Shuttle flights are operated by A319/A320 versus B752/B763 ten years ago.


Although EK, QR, EY etc. have contributed significantly, the trains are one of the massive factors.


That is because LHR connections are not attractive to us up here whether the OneLondon Alliance carriers like it or not. Their convenience is not our concern.


A couple of years ago I would agree - but have you used T5? Far better than DXB, DOH and AUH put together IMO.


EK/EY/QR/SQ have established themselves as the carriers of choice on the 'Kangaroo Route' from the North. I'm sure that QANTAS themselves are well aware that their LHR transfers are significantly disadvantaged against these more reliable and superior* products.

* 'Superior' here refers not to onboard cabin service, but to the transfer experience at LHR and the notorious unreliability of the frequently cancelled MAN-LHR Shuttles.


Lest we forget that at one point BA/QF owned the so-called 'Kangaroo route' yet the carriers you mentioned managed to dismount them from their perch. Could it not happen again?

As mentioned above, the days of terrible transfers at LHR have gone, certainly where BA is concerned!


It's not that long ago that BA were booking people over LHR-JFK rather than the direct MAN-JFK service as it can depend on "whose" passengers they are within a company. It's barmy but it's true. MAN is better off with Emirates, Etihad and Qatar, but I feel many still pine for the old legacy days of the old flag carriers and will never admit it. Now that's also barmy but I do understand it.


I think what is "barmy" is how naive people on here are. The majority of passengers that actually count (J and F) don't themselves choose who they fly with! You really think sales execs of, for example, a pharmaceutical company, decide whether they fly EK or BA simply on which they prefer? Those days went only 3 years ago. It is all down to contracts etc. If you're based in Manchester and you're having to go to SYD and your company is prone to using BA - guess what? Your going via LHR...

I know it isn't as black and white as that but remember - would BA rather have 10 F passengers flying MAN-LHR-the world on one of their A319s or 149 Y flying MAN-LHR? The shuttle isn't there to make money, it's there to provide LHR with the lucrative long haul passengers.

Just my 2 cents!

[Going loco]

That is because LHR connections are not attractive to us up here whether the OneLondon Alliance carriers like it or not. Their convenience is not our concern.

But there were 908,000 passengers recorded by the CAA as travelling between MAN-LHR in 2009. The aggregate total of Emirates, Qatar. Ethiad and Singapore was 935,000 in the same period.

MAN-LHR was comfortably the largest of the MAN-'hub' routes; MAN-DXB as the next biggest was getting on for 400,000 passengers fewer.

The data and the rhetoric don't appear to be telling the same tale here.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Hi MUFC_fan,

I will address only the points you raised relating to my own posting. Obviously, I will leave it to Skipness to address the concerns you raised regarding his postings.

Firstly, on the point that the railways have played a significant role in the reduction of MAN-LHR passenger numbers, I agree with you. My 10:47 posting in reply to GrahamK acknowledges this. I did not refer to the railway angle in my response to Skipness because the issue under discussion was QANTAS/Jetstar - a rather different topic. In fact, the reductions in BA capacity bit during the Rod Eddington era, and largely BEFORE the completion of the WCML upgrade, although I acknowledge the impact of the improved rail services since then.

On the original QF/Jetstar issue, my point is that the opportunity to avoid LHR transfers ex-MAN is compelling for travelers from this catchment area. The market share taken by the likes of EK/QR/EY/SQ demonstrate this fact clearly. You may enjoy LHR transfers (fair enough, each to their own!) but in the case of MAN-LHR-Australia services with QANTAS (the subject under discussion between Skipness and myself) a T5/T3 transfer is required. That is not attractive to me. (DXB, DOH or AUH will do me just fine). But more importantly, in order to transfer at LHR (even entirely using T5) you must first reach there. From my past experiences, I no longer have trust in BA to actually operate my connecting MAN-LHR Shuttle on the day - they frequently cancel.

Based on the above, it is my contention that if QANTAS is serious about attracting MAN-originating customers in volume, a Jetstar service direct from MAN competing head-to-head with EK/QR/EY/SQ represents their best chance of success. If they opt to rely on connecting flights via LHR, they will remain a bit-part player in the MAN-Australia market (but that is their choice to make). I still recall the period when QANTAS used to operate a QF-liveried BAe146 on MAN-LHR to connect with the B744 service; it frequently left with embarrassingly poor loads. I seriously doubt that the number of passengers on the BA A319's transiting through LHR to Australia has risen significantly since then. The intervening period has seen substantial expansion in capacity available from MAN with the aforementioned Gulf carriers and we KNOW that they have enjoyed thriving demand (in a finite market) between MAN and Australia.

On the third section you have extracted from my posting I find myself slightly puzzled. I'm unclear what your objection is in this case. In asking "could it not happen again?", do you mean in terms of QF becoming a force on services ex-MAN? If so, my response is they can if Jetstar competes head-on with the alternatives ex-MAN, but they will continue to underperform their brand potential if they [QF] rely on LHR transfers alone.

Speaking purely for myself, my records show that I have flown with QANTAS on 22 occasions. But my QF frequent flyer card has been gathering dust in a drawer for a very long time - ever since they pulled MAN services. Quite simply, they are no longer useful to me. Etihad and Emirates are. I am not alone. And that is the issue which QF must choose to address or ignore. I guess it will all come down to yield calculations at the final reckoning (fair enough). If they stick with LHR transfers they won't be seeing me. OneLondon Alliance codeshare deals don't impress me! If Jetstar offers Manchester-Australia direct ... now that will prompt me to reconsider!

Cheers, SHED.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Going Loco -

The topic under discussion between Skipness and myself was the Manchester - Australia market with specific reference to QANTAS/Jetstar. It was not a debate about demand for the Shuttle. Total patronage of the MAN-LHR Shuttle operation is irrelevant. Only the number of passengers using the MAN-LHR Shuttle to connect with QANTAS flights is relevant to the issue under discussion in my response to Skipness. I am discussing the 'Kangaroo Route' and my "rhetoric" refers only to that subject. Total demand for the air travel market between MAN and LHR is another issue entirely. Sorry if you misunderstood.

SHED.

[Going loco]

Ok, this should be very easy to clear up. How many passengers routed MAN-LHR-Australia, say in 2000, 2005 and 2009.
Look forward to seeing the numbers.

[Mr A Tis]

Having flown Qantas, I certainly would not put myself out to route via LHR. Having flown MAN-SYD quiet a few times, I always used to use Cathay MAN-HKG-SYD. Ah, those were the days.:)
These days, my journeys stop at HKG, I certainly won't go via LHR (the shuttles get cancelled by BA as soon as there is any wiff of trouble anywhere, so not reliable enough for me, that's my choice).
So these days, I'm with Swiss or Luftie, thus avoiding the stupid O'Clock plane change in the Gulf. Fair play to both these carriers, often over looked in the clamour for big shiny new big jets, but with multiple frequencies via ZRH, FRA, MUC, DUS HAM they've done a great job for MAN.:)

[conti onepass]

me being thick, but why did qantas pull the route , if it was popular. was it to do with BA AGAIN.

[Skipness One Echo]

The 767 is not as efficient as the 787 for obvious reasons. It is not fair to compare the aircraft by airline preferance over aircraft performance. Look at it this way: TOM are looking to fly to destinations such as Honolulu, Vietnam etc. - these would not have been possible with the 767.

As people have mentioned, flying Jetstar doesn't exactly mean moving over from Qantas. What a naive statement. What about EK, SQ, QR, EK, TK, AY or SK?


I think the great hope of the B787 is that you can fly from Origin to Destination without the annoying stop at Transits Stop(s). Now in the case of MAN and Jetstar, it's true that the better option for me as a passenger is clearly a one stop B787 service, competing with the one stop Middle East options. Re-read my point though. Jetstar, specifically is supposed to allow QANTAS to serve markets that mainline can't make money on. Ahh sounds like MAN, I agree. HOWEVER, bear in mind the business model of QANTAS feeding Oneworld at London with the A380. There are strong arguments within companies like this that to justify the immense capital investment in the BigBus and the cost of Oneworld, passengers be funnelled over London. Conversely at the other end, BA passengers on from Sydney have to travel on QANTAS metal. There is a friction between this model and the more direct loco Jetstar option. Hence what marketing at Jetstar see as an opportunity, certain departments within QANTAS will see as a threat.

Addressing your example of Swiss and Lufthansa, they don't really compete, they compliment. Both are full service legacy style (Can't say Swiss is legacy can we?) carriers operating similar fleets in similar markets. Indeed bmi is increasingly seen as the UK arm of Lufthansa as the European members of STAR join closer and closer together.

Personally I wouldn't choose to fly MAN-LHR-pitstop-OZ-final destination in a million years, but you need to be aware that certain people are insisting that the shiny new A380s are filled and Jetstar won't be helping that to happen.

The analogy of the B767 was that it would bypass hubs, exactly in the way the B787 is hyped to do. American launched ORD-MAN bypassing Pan Am's JFK hub and BA's LHR hub along the way. This was the future, a massive European expansion by AA helped to kill Pan Am off. Shoot forward a few decades and the AA European network is a fraction of it's former size and they now fly from their hubs in the US to their hub at LHR and some key European destinations. Even the MAN-ORD is no longer a B767....

The Alliances (not cartels surely) work that way alas. As to what's best for me as a passenger, that's secondary apparently. Forget QANTAS, Emirates is by far a more user friendly option. MAN-DXB-final destination trumps any theoretical MAN-middle east-AU hub-final destination any day. Unless you're Sydney or Melbourne bound, QANTAS is a pain.

[Vuelo]

While looking to book some seats between MAN and BRU last night, I was surprised to see SN are down to just two flights a day, from what was 4 a few months ago. What's this all about? Why the massive reduction on this route?

[OltonPete]

Vuelo

Showing 4 a day in September.

I assume that you were looking in August?

MAN & BHX I know for a fact get reduced services due to the business
closedown in August but normal service is resumed in September.

Pete

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Winter news from Monarch Airlines:
MAN-PMI will operate through the Winter. 3 x Weekly Thu/Sat/Sun.
Winter frequencies MAN-AGP/ALC to be increased.

[Manchester Exile]

Just to add my comments on this. 12 years ago I emigrated to Sydney, and I fly "home" several times each year. I used to enjoy using the Cathay service MAN-HKG-SYD, and when that discontinued I hubbed on QF or BA through LHR. However, multiple missed connections made me review that and now I use the excellent Etihad service from MAN. Interestingly, business-class fares on this service are more expensive than those from LHR. The Etihad business cabin into MAN always seems to be full, whilst economy is sparsely populated.

I have to say that almost nothing could now tempt me back to going via LHR. Last time I did it, I had a nightmare transfer from T3 to T5, waiting in a queue for 90 minutes and coming within a whisker of missing my connection (again.)

Whenever the Australian press talks about Jetstar's expansion into Europe, Manchester is never mentioned. Their favoured destinations seem to be Athens, Rome and Paris.

[Skipness One Echo]

Manchester is never mentioned. Their favoured destinations seem to be Athens, Rome and Paris.

Skyteam, Skyteam and Skyteam.

Markets with no QANTAS presence or Oneworld feed.

[Bagso]

Manchester to ease airports strike chaos - Manchester Evening News (http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/transport/public_transport/s/1313872_manchester_to_ease_airports_strike_chaos)


This was reported on another thread which has now dissappeared ?

I assume the strike will be called off but if it does take place it is interesting to see Manchester looking after its core longhaul customers "possibly" at the expense of handling BA long haul ops !

Must confess I have long since held the view that if BA have no desire to operate long haul at Manchester that is there issue, BUT equally there is no obligation to put them at the head of the queue when they have an operational problem at LHR.

..what goes round comes round

(...excepting any BA aircaft in the Manchester HOLDS that is !)

Anyway bags of room at Madrid !

[GrahamK]

You'd have thought BA, with any problems at LHR, would just operate some flights from LGW, now a non BAA airport, and a BA base?

[airhumberside]

Theres no way Gatwick could accomodate everything BA will want to try and still operate, especially at peak times when it is full or almost full. Add in the fact the strikes maybe on a Bank Holiday and Gatwick will be limited in what diverted traffic it can accomodate, likewise for Luton

[Ringwayman]

Well BA do have the EDI, GLA and ABZ domestic runs that won't be operating, so that's room for about 15 services at a minimum but I envisage they'll want them to be putting some long-haul routs on those slots. If they did choose to run some long-haul out of MAN, I wonder if they would "abuse" a 777 or 747 by operating them on our routes so passengers would only have to be informed of making their way to LGW and flown on a "connecting" service instead of making their own way to MAN with the inbound long-haul pax going to approximately where they want to be after connecting at MAN. I can't see the point of them running all the LHR long-haul out of LGW as there would be, I imagine, no room to park them all.

[mickyman]

BAA....

It will not come to strike action.

MM

[1station]

If the strike does go ahead whats the chances of an A380 arriving before the 1st September Emirates launch?

[Ringwayman]

Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Qantas are apparently planning to route there A380s here.

[Bagso]

Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Qantas are apparently planning to route there A380s here.

...what could possibly go wrong ...!

......pray for arbitration before next week or the pax might still be onboard on bonfire night ...!

[Ringwayman]

conversely...if all 3 airlines are planning to use MAN, it means they have great confidence in MAN's ability to handle the aircraft and passengers. If MAN was no good, it wouldn't keep being handed awards.

[airhumberside]

Well BA do have the EDI, GLA and ABZ domestic runs that won't be operating,
BA gave up ABZ-LGW a while ago - it's a Flybe route these days

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

I guess the point is that for the duration of any strike, slots normally deployed for flights operating to/from the six affected BAA airports would be vacant and available for reallocation. Of course, this applies at MAN just as much as at LGW. We have frequent scheduled services to LHR, SOU, EDI, GLA and ABZ which would all be hit (sadly no STN!). MAN would actually require afew inbound diversions just to recover the throughput we would see on a regular non-strike day.

By the way, have the original threads discussing the possible BAA strike been amalgamated and moved to a forum I have been unable to locate, or have they been zapped by the mods or their originators? Thanks.

[rapidman47]

conversely...if all 3 airlines are planning to use MAN, it means they have great confidence in MAN's ability to handle the aircraft and passengers. If MAN was no good, it wouldn't keep being handed awards.
A few months back I remember posting on another thread about another NW airport winning awards. A person on this thread who I will not name said that airport awards are so easy to come by they are worthless :E

[wanna_be_there]

A few months back I remember posting on another thread about another NW airport winning awards.

Here we go again, another one trying to start a MAN-V-LPL arguement.

Can we please just keep LPL in its own thread and MAN in in this one, its getting very tiresome now!

[rapidman47]

Here we go again, another one trying to start a MAN-V-LPL arguement.
My dear friend I did not mention or mean Liverpool take your rose tinted specs off.
If you want to know the airport that I was referring too, It was Blackpool:=

[Momentary Lapse]

He wasn't. He was making the point that someone said awards are worthless because they're so easy to come by. It's true: the awards industry exists solely to give management a chance to go on the expenses-paid piss for the afternoon and take turns to slap each other on the back.

Nothing to do with Liverpool. He didn't name them: you did.

(Crossed with previous post but point still valid)

[conti onepass]

whats going on with monarch...manchester delays everyday for hours.

[NEastMidlands]

Not just Monarch however, Thomas Cook have 3 leased a/c in everyday these days

[Rob Courtney]

Returned through T1 today and was pleasently suprised, yes the work on Pier B means that the place is a bit of a shed but from tha aircraft arriving onto stand to driving off the car park after clearing immigration and collecting four bags took 20 mins which in my book is what really counts.

Going out I found departures very good (apart from being herded through duty free!!) with security freindly and efficient.

[Hamburg 2K8]

Yes, I think T1 departures has really improved since the refurbishment. Arrivals still needs improving at peak times through immigration but overall not bad.

How are immigration going to cope when the A380 comes in and the baggage hall? It's not the biggest of places at MAN! Are the airbridges installed yet? I'm gonna try and get a cheap flight with an airline out of T1 next month just to see Pier B and the new gate 12

[Going loco]

Isn't the A380 only going to be around 70 - 80 passengers more than the 777 - so say 150 extra on a typical turnaround.

Wasn't MAN at it's peak handling about 5m passengers a year more than it does now - say 13,500 a day on average.

So your concern is that airport that has at least 13,500 passengers per day capacity (much more in reality because of improvemnts and the fact it wasn't maxed out even at 22m+) won't be able to cope with an extra 150.

I'll go out on a limb here and say all will be fine.

[Rob Courtney]

One of the bridges was part installed today when we trundled past on our way to stand 7

[Button-pusher]

would love to see MAN-SYD, once a week guys :)...

[ericlday]

How often would you use it BP ?

[siftydog]

MAN -SYD already operates twice daily, sometimes more! (Just a 2 hour leg stetch in DXB / AUH)

[spannersatcx]

You could join any number of flts together to get to where you want so there are thousands of MAN-SYD flts a week.:rolleyes:

[aeulad]

Airliners.net saying UA/CO to start ORD-MAN.

Regards

Mike

[Ringwayman]

But spanners, how many of the "any number of flts together to get to where you want so there are thousands of MAN-SYD flts a week" can actually be operated MAN-one stop-SYD?

Getting a bit impatient for CX news but as long as they comeback (and tell BA what to do with themselves in case they try to block it), then we can wait a while longer.

[Nomoresteerage]

News**/**Airport ready for A380 after £10m upgrade THEBUSINESSDESK.COM (http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/53096-airport-ready-for-a380-after-10m-upgrade.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NorthWest_19th_Aug_2010_-_Daily_E-mail)


MANCHESTER Airport has been officially certified as 'A380 ready' ahead of the arrival of the maiden flight from Dubai next month.

After a £10m upgrade Manchester will become one of just 17 airports in the world which will be served regularly by the massive Airbus aircraft, which can carry 517 passengers.

An inspection by the Civil Aviation Authority's Aerodrome Standards Division has now ratified the facilities at Manchester.

The airport has upgraded he airfield and its infrastructure to meet the standards for the Emirates super-jumbo.

Taxi-ways have had to be widened, realigned and reinforced at junctions and turns as well as perimeter fences and more than 50 airfield signs moved further away so the super jumbo can pass safely

In the terminal, a new aircraft stand has been built with an advance docking system, which guides the pilot onto the stand and into the correct position for the unique double air bridge to connect.

Manchester Airport managing director Andrew Cornish said: "A lot of hard work and planning has gone into the arrival from many people across the business and we’re pleased that as an aerodrome we can accept the newest type of aircraft flying today and that Emirates has recognised Manchester as a world class airport.”

As well as building a new stand the airport has also updated the pier with a new pre-boarding lounge to accommodate passengers.

It has also added two new fire-fighting vehicles. One of the vehicles hosts a turntable system with a 30-metre extending ladder which can be extended over inflated emergency exit chutes, enabling the Fire Service to gain access to any level of an aircraft, including those where conventional ladders might not reach.

With the airport now being classed as ‘A380 ready’ this makes Manchester a ‘Category 10’ airport, meaning that the airport can not only accept the A380 but other ‘Code F’ aircraft such as some of the larger freighter aircraft that are operating around the world.

[Skipness One Echo]

Getting a bit impatient for CX news but as long as they comeback (and tell BA what to do with themselves in case they try to block it), then we can wait a while longer.

Flag carrier envy? It's not difficult to get MAN-HKG with one stop and Cathay are not going to be flying non-stop.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Now that MAN is a confirmed 'Category 10' airport, does this clear the way for acceptance of the Antonov 225 again? Were there other 'large freighter' types which MAN was deemed unable to accept? I am aware that demand for visits by the AN225 and the like is extremely limited (or absent altogether!) but it would be interesting to confirm that MAN is approved to accept these types should the need arise.

Any clarification appreciated. SHED.

[wanna_be_there]

but it would be interesting to confirm that MAN is approved to accept these types should the need arise.

I was under the impression we were always able to accept the AN-225? There has certainly been a visit of one in the last couple of years (2007 maybe??)

Just search youtube for AN225 Manchester and there are 2-3 videos of the visit.

[roverman]

Category 10 in this context refers to RFFS cover, specifically for the A380. Cargo aircraft require much lower (or sometimes none at all) RFF Category.
The issues arround the AN225 are more to do with the neccessary disruption caused to operations which arises from the cumbersome transit of this huge aircraft between runway(s) and suitable parking stands. MAN is not ideally laid out in this respect, with many taxilanes bordered by stands which have to be cleared of aircraft for a 225 to pass by. EMA is better suited for this aircraft, with a long parallel taxiway and separate accesses to individual aprons.

[Hamburg 2K8]

So with less than 2 weeks to go and the announcement that MAN is ready for the A380, I take it that the new stand 12 and the 2 airbridges have been tested and are all ready for the beast?

How's Pier B's redecorating coming along? I hope the its going to look better than the old style, especially when the emrites passengers will be travelling through their soon, quite a walk from the departure lounge! When everything is complete, will you be able to walk down to gate 12? It was blocked off last time I was there (about 3 weeks ago).

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Hi wanna be there,

The operative word in my posting was "again"; I have my own photographs from the AN225's one previous visit to MAN. I believe it was taking equipment to Nigeria for a charity concert back then. My question was prompted by the last line of the article posted by "nomoresteerage" (posting no.120). It mentions that MAN will now be able to accept certain large freighter types which were previously excluded.

The AN225 visit caused problems, as 'Roverman' alludes to. The airport made it known that the type would not be accepted again based on the infrastructure available at that time. However, the airport still regularly accepts AN124's.

So two questions arise from this. Firstly, would the AN225 be accepted following the work done in readiness for the A380 (and based on 'Roverman's' response the answer would appear to be "no"). And secondly, the article refers to "Code F aircraft" (plural); what other freighter types, previously excluded by MAN, would now be accepted? Or would MAG, as a matter of policy, still offload large freighter business to the inhouse sister airport at EMA (or elsewhere)?

Any insights would be appreciated. SHED.

[dontdoit]

Any news why? Heard at least 1 a/c underneath us diverting to Birmingham.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Local reports suggest that a FlyBe Q400 evacuated on 23R.

With the fire service fully committed, a number of other aircraft were unable to accept the delays caused by the emergency and diverted elsewhere.

[daz211]

Anyone know what is going or went on at MAN about an hour ago ? lots of diverting arrivals ...:confused:...

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Local reports of a FlyBe Q400 evacuation on 23R.

(Posting 128 [above] is part of another thread from a different forum which has been merged into this one. Hence the chronology of responses appears illogical in retrospect.)

[wanna_be_there]

In terms ofthe AN225, at a time when its imperative the flight is to/from MAN, then im sure they would accept it. Yes it was a bit of a logistical nightmare, but they housed the AN225 for a couple of nights and the airport operated its normal schedule around it, so they *could* handle it again.

In terms of other code F aircraft, the B747-8 is in that category and CX cargo have them on order. CX seem to send us the new aircraft and the MAN flights are well patronised, so they could send the B747-8 to us (I dont know which one it is, but a stand has already been marked up with a B747-8 stopline.

[daz211]

Thanks for the info "SHED" hope all is ok !

[wanna_be_there]

according the the MEN, the MAN-SOU flight returned after a burning smell in the cabin. Pax evacuated on the runway and airport closed whilst to emergency cover was occupied.

[RoyHudd]

Maybe it happened, but unlikely as reported. Evacs on active r/w's are not initiated simply due to burning smells. These happen all the time in the galleys, especially with horrible crew meals.

It takes much more to let the punters loose. Smoke in the cockpit for example.

(MEN is not a reliable source on aviation matters, or much else come to think of it. Good for cheap used cars though)

[Wally1]

A few more details here:-

Airport shutdown after plane makes emergency landing - Manchester Evening News (http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/transport/s/1314540_airport_shutdown_after_plane_makes_emergency_landing )

[750XL]

Drove past stand 12 three days ago and there was one bridge installed, but didn't look like they'd done any tests on it (was lying very low to the ground so not sure if all the electrics had been installed).

Wonder how long it'll be until the second one arrives? Hope they do a good bit of testing on the new bridges considering how all the other bridges at MAN handle :ok:

Also noticed another bridge dumped near Staff West today, looks like it's come off T3? (One of those Natwest ones)

[Burpbot]

Why are you on prune whilst in the hold?

[zerotohero]

Runway one! lol

Does Manchester have a runway one! maybe they confused it with runway two they used instead! lol

[Todders]

Yes it does interestingly or not, your choice, i made a joke about the same thing once and was kindly informed that as far as the airport authorities/estates and operations are concerned the original runway is indeed runway one (23R/05L) and the newer, relief runway is runway two (23L/05R). Hence in their statements they refer to them as such.

[Scottie Dog]

750XL

"Also noticed another bridge dumped near Staff West today, looks like it's come off T3? (One of those Natwest ones)"

This may have come off stand 55. I note that stands 45 & 46 have been closed and replaced by stand 44R - according to latest Notam.

[dontdoit]

Burpbot - I was referring to an aircraft I had heard on the R/T, whilst I was flying, earlier in the day. Thank you for your idiotic observation.

[spannersatcx]

In terms of other code F aircraft, the B747-8 is in that category and CX cargo have them on order. CX seem to send us the new aircraft and the MAN flights are well patronised, so they could send the B747-8 to us (I dont know which one it is, but a stand has already been marked up with a B747-8 stopline.

I believe the 747-8 will enter service with CX sometime in the new year. It will fly to europe and the UK. It will not fly to LHR as they would/could not make the necessary changes to stands to handle it. MAN I believe said no problemo! :D

[Cumulogranite]

The bridge down at staff wales is off 47

[vectisman]

I have been reading these forums out of interest for some time but have never made a posting. However as a passenger on yesterday's Flybe flight that made an emergency landing at Manchester I feel I wish to make a contribution. I hope by doing so I am not breaking any rules, apologies in advance if I have done so.
A few minutes after take off the cabin did begin to feel with smoke. As it became thicker there was some concern amongst passengers but everyone was incredibly calm and attentive when we were informed by cabin crew that the captain had sent out a mayday to Manchester and that we would be returning to land asap. Cabin crew were superb reassuring passengers and checking the cabin.
As I was sitting at towards the rear of the plane I along with another gentleman were briefed on how to open the exits on both sides of the rear of the plane. We then returned to our seats for landing.By the time we did land the smoke was quite dense.
The landing was fast but the aircraft stopped quickly turning a little to the left.
The fire service was alongside within a minute. We were then ordered by the captain to 'Evacuate, Evacuate! which we did using all 4 exits not just the steps. I know this because I used the rear emergency exit on the right hand side of the plane as did several other passengers.Once again the attitude of my fellow passengers was commendable.
I was very impressed by care of flight and cabin crew after the evacuation to ensure all passengers were ok.
After quick checks, head counts etc we were taken to an area which must be designated for such events. We were all impressed by the follow up care offered by the Manchester Airport and Flybe Staff. 25 of us elected to travel on the 1840 service back to Southampton. Six passengers who lived locally decided to return home for a bit of a break.
Some passengers whilst in the holding area did overhear that the smoke may have been coming from the cockpit but I cannot confirm this for certain.
Overall I was impressed by the handling of the whole situation. We were always kept fully informed.Interestingly most of the passengers who continued to travel were very positive about the airline and the airport. This goes to show if incidents are handled correctly and openly damage can be minimised.
I hope this reads ok!
V.

[Skipness One Echo]

It will not fly to LHR as they would/could not make the necessary changes to stands to handle it. MAN I believe said no problemo!

It wouldn't be a real problem at Heathrow. Scheduled Cargo flights are negligible now and there are no times when all three cargo stands 607-609 are all scheduled to be in use. Hence they could happily use 607 and 609 leaving 608 empty. It's also possible to use the 610s for smaller aircraft than the 747s.

[spannersatcx]

That maybe so, LHR were asked if they could make stand adjustments or whatever was needed and they said NO, hence CX will not fly a 747-8 to LHR.:=

[roverman]

In response to a few recent posts:

There is no blanket ban on AN225, it would simply be a matter of assessing the commercial vs. logistical issues of any specific flight if it were to be requested, and deciding whether it can be accommodated. The work done for the A380 does not solve all the 225 issues as the 225 is significantly bigger (larger than ICAO Code F, which is max. span 80m) and it goes to a different part of the apron.

B747-8F will operate into MAN for CX next year, gradually replacing the -400F as the fleet rolls over. Stand 73 will be modified this autumn in readiness for CX, with another stand, probably 82, to follow in due course. The 'November' taxilane will be widened by moving the roadways, to allow for the -8's larger wingspan. Incidentally, Stand 206 at T2 (recently reconfigured) is capable should a pax version ever arrive.

The NatWest airbridge is indeed from Stand 47, which is being modified to suit the fleet and traffic profiles now using T3. T3 now has much LoCo who are not so bothered about airbridges. 47 will now be A319 capable, along with the reorganised 44R. 45 and 46 have been withdrawn in the process. Stands across the airport will continue to be reconfigured as fleets and turnaround requirements change.

[Ian Brooks]

Just out of interest what is the difference in wingspan and length for 748 compared with 744

Ian B

[dwlpl]

13 foot 2 inches.

[BOAC]

vectisman- I am surprised no-one has picked up on your post. A most valued contribution - thank you. It seems that congratulations are due to all involved.

[JackRalston]

Recently got back from a 2 week Cheadle CC Cricket Tour to Barbados and felt it was good to do a report.

Flew out on VIR77 1st Aug stand 212, security very good and everything was flowing perfectly. Killed some time in Frankie&Bennys and some (eastern european - sorry he just was) drunken person chundered everywhere at the entrance to it, not a pleasant sight. Boarded on time but then had an hour delay due to a problem with how the baggage had been loaded (which must of been all our main luggage and kit bags section). Departed an hour late and then one of my teammates main luggage didn't turn up, turns out it didn't get on the flight but it arrived a few days later.

Flew back on VIR78 15th/16th Aug, turned up to BGI 4hrs early due to not been able to book in groups so we got there early to sort it out. Flight out delayed by 30 minutes due to the aircraft's APU not working which meant running eng no.4 for a while before we got going. Flight back ok, arrived at 9:40am, security queue was VERY long at T2, but thankfully I have an e-passport so only waited a few mins, I had done it before so quick scan and walla! through! went through to baggage claim, our bags took VERY long to get through because we were first to get our bags on the flight, we waited a good 30-40minutes before ours came through. Then a MASSIVE queue to go through customs, we had to queue from our carousel (01), police sniffer dogs were there (im sure the stench of our cricket shirts probably scared them) and then we finally got through. It took us nearly 2hrs from landing to leaving the airport. Security wasn't too bad for e-passport people but for others it was very long although it was fully staffed! After customs waited a few mins for a taxi, very well organised with the person informing us of who's next etc and then arrived back in Withington 15 mins after that!

Not too bad at all tbh seen as it was a very busy morning that we arrived on. A great 2 weeks of sun, beach, sea, pool, clubbing, vast amounts of alcohol and the occasional cricket game ;)

Stand 12 had one airbridge installed but it was right down to the ground so not sure of it's status. Everything else not too bad!

[Ian Brooks]

Thanks DWLPL
That`s a lot of extra work for 13 feet, but wings are growing longer it seems for all planes nowaday


Ian B

[AircraftOperations]

E-Passports don't read a person's iris. That is what Iris machines do.

There is no security in immigration - these are immigration officers.

[liffy2A]

Great post vectisman, Glad your ok, I dont me to be too harsh but I find this very hard to believe, Captain telling passengers that they are in great danger over the PA? Maybe inform them about going back to MAN maybe, but telling them of a mayday! Everyone remaining calm with dense smoke!( If it was electical smoke people would be finding it hard to breath) This post looks like PR spin to me! Maybe some airline managers are keeping an eye on this site after all LOL. This sounds like a serious incident. Well done to all the people involved. If I'm wrong about this your post appologies. But I'm reading the red writing at the bottom of every page on pprune making my opinion! Flybe crew deserve more money than there peers in PR if i'm right.

[vectisman]

Dear liffya2

Further to your comments I would like to make a few reponses.

1) I have never been employed in any sector of the aviation business.

2) I abhor all types of spin in whatever guise.

3) The Captain never told us we were in 'great danger'. We were informed by cabin crew that a mayday had been sent and that we were returning to Manchester. I think most passengers were just grateful that something was being done.

4) I can say categorically there was no obvious panic. Of course people were concerned but responded appropriately. I accept that this may not always be the case but on August 19th people were sensible.

5) I contributed the post in all good faith to give my viewpoint on the incident as I happened to be a passenger on the flight.

6) I am completely unaware of the internal politics of any airline. I am simply one of those people who pays my money and travels with an airline that happens to fly to where I want to go.

7) I also just wanted to show my appreciation to all who helped out on Thursday. Its great to still be able to enjoy life!!

Im now off to have a great weekend. I hope you have a good one too.

V.

[mrmagooo]

liffy, who said anything about electrical smoke?

Is it not possible to actually believe this guy was a passenger?

[Ian Brooks]

Vectismanhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif
A nice clear report

Ian B

[Otto Throttle]

Vman,

Welcome to proon, and thanks for the post. As you have already discovered, some people are either too stupid or too lazy to read what actually gets posted, so don't feel you need to defend yourself or your post. It's one of the dubious 'joys' of the internet.

Glad it all turned out OK for all involved.

[Momentary Lapse]

25 years ago this month it all turned out a lot worse.

[Ian Brooks]

Yes I remember it well, I was in Kendal that day, not the sort of thing you forget!
A friend of mine worked in the fire brigade at the airport then


Ian

[Ringwayman]

It's not just this month, it's tomorrow. 2 memorial services being held at the airport.

[Hamburg 2K8]

So still only 1 airbridge installed but on the ground at stand 12. With under 2 weeks to go when is this going to be finished?

Also, was wonderning, can A380 use 23L/05R? I know the times it's in 23R/05L is in use only, but incase it needed to can it use R2?

[wanna_be_there]

The second jetbridge is up and having its final install tweaks. also, the a380 can use both runways and the turning circle at the end of 23l

[mickyman]

So it seems that everything is 'in hand' with regard to the A380's
arrival.....the doom mongers can now await the 'absolute chaos'
predicted for the daily arrival of the behemoth!

Bring it on.....MM

[bjones4]

Spent the weekend being a geek at Manchester and noticed that the 23R ILS appears to be out of order with aircraft doing VOR DME approaches, any particular reason?

On another note, NATS have put new MAN charts online including one showing areas cleared for A380 ground movements

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadbasic/pamslight-CC394672902F9CDC57FC6FA98455839E/7FE5QZZF3FXUS/EN/Charts/AD/AIRAC/EG_AD_2_EGCC_2-3_en_2010-07-29.pdf

[HXdave]

is the end of 23L classed as a turning circle, or just a taxiway that happens to go back on itself. from what i see, a turning circles mid 23L is B767 MAX & Juliet turning circle on 23R is B747 max.

However, as usual, i stand to be corrected.

[wanna_be_there]

is the end of 23L classed as a turning circle, or just a taxiway that happens to go back on itself

The charts seem to class it as the latter, I think its just commonly known as a turning circle due to its primary use (to enable a backtrack along the runway)

So it seems that everything is 'in hand' with regard to the A380's
arrival.....the doom mongers can now await the 'absolute chaos'
predicted for the daily arrival of the behemoth!

Yep it seems MAN is going to prove the nay-sayers wrong (I for one was a sort of nay sayer, as it seemed to take an age for those jetbridges to arrive). I believe Emirates set down a deadline for stand 12, and formed a 'no A380 until stand 12 is ready' ultimatum (which is understandable for the F/J class pax).
Anyway, now the stand is ready, I suppose its time for the doom-mongers to start on something else, like the 'baggage belts will fail with the pressure' or 'immigration/customs cant cope' kind of stories.

I for one am going to be quite proud that my local, regional airport is going to host the A380 on regular flights. Also, there have been many arguements that F class wont work at MAN, well, we now have 2 carriers offering F, with EY looking at joining the club.

Everone else at MAN should be proud too. I mean, for a regional airport with a medium sized city, we have a quite enviable offering of services:

-A daily A380 service, which even an airport the size of AMS/MIA/ORD/MUC etc hasnt even got yet
-CX to start using the B747-8 next year, making MAN the only UK airport to see the A380 AND the B747-8 on regular services (yes LHR has A380's, but not B747-8, likewise STN will see the B747-8 but not the A380)
-We are one of a few European airports that can support the 3 big middle east carriers (EY/QR/EK), whereas others can only cope with 1 or 2
-up to 5 New york services a day (CO/DL/AA/PK), whereas most other UK airports and even Euro airports can only manage 2-3
-Some good legacy carriers like AA/SQ/US and so on, with a good mix of loco and charter traffic to boot
-the first UK based B787 will be at MAN with TOM

So come on, yes, MAN has had better days (with QF/CX/SAA and so on), but for the size of city MAN is compared to AMS/MAD/LON etc, we have a lot to be proud of!

[AircraftOperations]

I was told that "runway 2" would be used for the A380. Not sure if this is correct. Also, a trip into MAN on Friday showed that the interior of B Pier still needs lots of work, if it is to be all new and shiny in 10 days' time - even if the airbridges are already on.

[roverman]

23R ILS is fine and CAT 3. It has been off-line to facilitate the 300 hour burn-in of the 05L end, to meet its CAT 3 certification.

A380 can use either runway, CAA approval covers both. 05R is better for easterly arrivals, and 23L for westerly departures because it avoids the procedural constraints applying to Taxiway Juliet, and so you'll see the A380 using the southern runway even during the usual mid-day downtime.

[42psi]

is the end of 23L classed as a turning circle, or just a taxiway that happens to go back on itself

The charts seem to class it as the latter, I think its just commonly known as a turning circle due to its primary use (to enable a backtrack along the runway)

Correctish :ok:

Although it's often referred to as the "Whiskey-Yankee loop" .... try saying that on the R/T quickly .....

It's not normally called a turning circle ... that's used for the "midpoint turning circle" ..... this clarifies it from the second turning circle which used to be at the exit onto Twy Whiskey.

The loop is also used to hold landing a/c before backtracking while the following a/c land ....

this confuses many as out of three landing a/c it'll often be the third one which arrives northside first ... the first two get held in the loop ... the last one uses the mid-point to turn.


:}

[Bagso]

....for a regional airport with a medium sized city, we have a quite enviable offering of services:

Don't wish to be critical but its typical of the "Northern mentality" that we are happy with our lot ..!

Manchester is a major European city, the constant reference to regional is so dispiriting especially when "the locals" believe it themselves..... the stereotype is then re emphasised by the M.E.N, look North West, Radio Manchester etc.

Compared to the other airports mentioned, Manchester does indeed punch above its weight, BUT the comparison is floored.....the figure we should be looking at is GDP and that by and large is serviced by Heathrow instead of direct service to the North -West. The GDP of Manchester is one of the largest in Europe and for a variety of reasons, the services Manchester attracts, meets only a fraction of that demand !

[Egerton Flyer]

Hi Bagso,
I'm a northerner and I now see MAN as a regional airport, there was a time I thought different.
Manchester is not the capital city, shame (ish). Or the major hub airport in the country. It is a regional airport.:sad:
It is always great to see new services, bigger aircraft etc, but we have to be realistic and thats another thing we are good at.:ok:


E.F.

[Skipness One Echo]

So come on, yes, MAN has had better days (with QF/CX/SAA and so on), but for the size of city MAN is compared to AMS/MAD/LON etc, we have a lot to be proud of!

Why do you say this?
Compare a multi stop service with QANTAS or Cathay to a one stop service with EK, QR or EY. These are MAN's best days, it amazes me that people just don't see it. Just because the legacy flag carriers have retreated into alliances doesn't mean the competitions is second rate, they're often better!

Correct me if I'm wrong but Eithad are using high Y low C B77Ws at the moment, the sort they used to use at Gatwick. F class was introduced on the back of the Singapore stop at Munich and I don't think it adds a whole lot really as if you can afford to fly First it's silly to fly MAN-MUC-SIN-destination when you can lose at least one stop via LHR / AMS / FRA etc.

Though parking an A380 at the end of a pier built for the BEA One-Eleven fleet where arrivals and departures are on the same level and at busy times has a pile of Thomas Cook and Jet2 punters, well nothing's going to go wrong there. If only you had a purpose built large capacity building that was designed for wide bodies...one that sits empty for much of the day. If only, if only..... Actually having seen the two airbridges in position, can someone confirm that one of them is upper deck capable and that they're not both going to be used on the lower deck?

Anyway my weekend trip LHR-MAN threw up two queries for me.
1) Why does the Tower controller have to ask what SID all departing aircraft has been given by Clearance Delivery who presumably sits nearby? Surely this is on the screen in front of him or does MAN just have adouble check for sleepy pilots?
2) When did the taxiway layout at MAN become so complicated. I usually note my route in and out ( Yes I am unusual, we've established that) and I actually got lost even with the AIS chart on my lap. It made CDG look straightforward!

[Eurotraveller]

Skipness,

The tower controller only asks aircraft heading South-East towards Honiley to confirm the SID allocation.

There are two SIDs which finish at HON when 23L/R is in operation, the HON1R/Y and the LISTO1R/Y.

LISTO SIDs are for aircraft with a MTOW of 35 tonnes or less plus 146s, ERJs, CRJs and some other small jet types. The LISTO SID consists of a left turn towards LISTO and does not feature the noise abatement turn to the West of Knutsford which is a feature of the HON1R/Y SIDs used by larger aircraft.

Because both SIDs lead to HON, I believe there is some history of larger jet aircraft incorrectly flying the LISTO SID instead of the HON SID, which is why Tower now seek confirmation of which procedure you have been cleared to fly.

I agree that the taxiway layout can be confusing, particularly at the base of Pier B where taxiways B,K,J and F all intersect - there is also a disparity between the airfield signage and the Jeppesen charts in this area which can cause further confusion.

[Ian Brooks]

The request to repeat the clearance is to confirm that pilots have got it right as a number set off using the wrong routeing and cause a possible conflict mainly on southern routes, I sure some of you guys at the front end can explain better than I have
I don`t class MAN as a regional airport as it has a considerable long haul presence
and the way things are looking are going to expand againhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/embarass.gif
Once one airline offers F class on long haul they will all follow suit as they cannot afford to loose those clients to another airline, afterall 3 or 4 F class make a very large differnce to whether a route is profit or loss making route

Ian B

[wanna_be_there]

Why do you say this?
Compare a multi stop service with QANTAS or Cathay

I was mearly commenting on the days we had these carriers serving MAN, not on the number of stops involved.

it's silly to fly MAN-MUC-SIN-destination when you can lose at least one stop via LHR / AMS / FRA

yes people can transit one stop, but LHR, I know many people who refuse to fly through LHR now. No point asking why as they are the fare paying passenger and its their preference. Also, some people may want F for the entire journey, and LHR for example, only offers Y on its domestics.

If only you had a purpose built large capacity building that was designed for wide bodies...one that sits empty for much of the day

If you are referring to T2, then pier B was chosen due to the fact the A380 can turn off the runway and taxi into stand quickly and easily without circumnavigating the entire airport.

Actually having seen the two airbridges in position, can someone confirm that one of them is upper deck capable and that they're not both going to be used on the lower deck?

Yes one is upper deck and one is lower deck. The jetbridges are not fully installed yet and need the electircs fitted, which is why it gives the impression that they are both lower deck.

Don't wish to be critical but its typical of the "Northern mentality" that we are happy with our lot ..!

MAN IS a regional airport. It is not the capital so is a regional. We may be a major city, but small compared to some. Also, considering LHR is quickly reached by plane and train, its amazing to sercure the services we have. I know JFK has seen the EK A388 before, but to think we secured the EK A380 before JFK got it back, and before HKG and some of the other large airports, Im sorry but thats a major coup!

So lets stop this moaning and enjoy the posatives of our airport!!!!

[Skipness One Echo]

Once one airline offers F class on long haul they will all follow suit as they cannot afford to loose those clients to another airline, afterall 3 or 4 F class make a very large differnce to whether a route is profit or loss making route

No this is going the wrong way as the number of people doing this is quite tiny in proportion to the revenue of more Business and Economy passengers. Essentially SQ is flying fresh air and upgrades in the F cabin MAN-MUC and a few more full fare C or Y seats will do more for the bottom line than a forward cabin full of upgrades.

Impressed that they're turning a B777-300ER in 1 hour 20 mins though. Apologies if this has been posted but do passengers need to get off at Munich both ways?

[wanna_be_there]

No this is going the wrong way as the number of people doing this is quite tiny in proportion

Well, with only 8 F seats, of course the numbers are going to be tiny. Even if just 4 people get on in MAN, then thats a 50/50 split between MAN-MUC.

Impressed that they're turning a B777-300ER in 1 hour 20 mins though. Apologies if this has been posted but do passengers need to get off at Munich both ways?

Yes pax do have to get off at MUC. In terms of the turn around, another feat MAN will have is turning an A380 round with only an extra 5 mins to spare over the current B773

[doorplane]

I see it has been announced that MAN has appointed its next MD, giving the job to Commercial Director Andrew Harrison, and creating a new role of COO with Penny Coates (whol I believe is currently MD for the smaller airports in the MAG portfolio).

If this is the case, whats the thoughts? Good appointments? Internal (but with external CEO starting) so maybe they provide good continuity?

[Suzeman]

See below for the MEN story a couple of weeks ago.

Seems to be a good idea with a new man at the top but experienced internal people on the next tier down.

Penny set to take MAG to new highs - Manchester Evening News (http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/business/s/1313729_penny_set_to_take_mag_to_new_highs)

[Hamburg 2K8]

Link to NATS doesn't work, saying object not found. Is the link correct?

Have MAN said anything about replacing Pier B in the future? Also, next time I fly from T1 at MAN, will I be able to walk down Pier B and have a nosey at Gate 12? So Gate 12 is the waiting area at the end of Pier B and the pre-boarding area is the extension?

[bjones4]

The chart has been moved from the previous location, Try this one;

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/pamslight/pdf/4e415453/EG/C/EN/Charts/AD/EG_AD_2_EGCC_2-3_en

[Hamburg 2K8]

Cheers bjones4, that worked that time.

[AircraftOperations]

What was the AN-124 doing at MAN over the weekend?

Loaded in or out?
What was it carrying?
From where and to where?

Any answers would be gratefully received.

[Betablockeruk]

Your tag suggests you should know ;)

1) Out, struggled to climb. But excellent to see pronounced vapour trails and pressure cloud above wing.
2) Something heavy....
3) In from India, out to Azerbaijan

[Bagso]

... to think we secured the EK A380 before JFK got it back, and before HKG and some of the other large airports, Im sorry but thats a major coup!

That's because Emirates (and indeed Etihad and Qatar) have recognised the massive amount of trade they can shift back and forth from the North West through their hubs to destinations not currently served direct from Manchester..... the A380 along with increased frequency is "hopefully" a long term statement of intent in this regard !

True AMS /MUC don't have the A380 BUT Munich does not need them, it already has direct service, (sometimes double daily), to places like Tokyo, Bangkok, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, Delhi, Hong Kong, JoBurg, Mumbai !

Many airlines use their European hubs to connect to these cities but Emirates appears to be about to shift numbers on an "industrial scale".

With regard to the A380 route comparisons, Amsterdam is clearly a different proposition, but it is worth exploring the Frankfurt/Munich model, Manchester does compare to MUC both economically and geographically, it is not dissimilar to the Heathrow/Manchester relationship. Unlike the UK however, the German Government and national airline set up a structure to support major intercontinental flights without "total" centralisation at one major hub, Frankfurt.

In the UK and at Manchester especially, Emirates have recognised the void, long may it continue, but please lets not roll over happy with what is nothing more than a "sprinkling" of intercontinental direct flights !

The "regional" argument that diminishes Manchester is presumably based on comparing our route structure with places like Birmingham, Bristol and Newcastle ? but if this is the case it is a poor argument.

These cities are indeed very much "regional", that is a part my complaint with the local media, they are inward looking. Within the EU, the US, and Asia, Manchester is very much a "major international city", Emirates have recognised this and indeed the demand, sadly its own citizens so often fail to see its wider international image and are happy to embrace the "eeeh by gum , whippet and cloth cap culture". (As an aside local media so often then reinforce this stereotypical image. The idiotic weatherman on Granada is a case in point !)

The comparison put forward re Manchester should actually be with a major "International City" and indeed gateway and that is Munich !

I well understand the "commercial hub interests" that prevail at Heathrow but an underlying policy that pretty much sucks "total UK demand" into an airport already at Max capacity and constrained by numerous other factors is at some stage doomed to end in failure. The doom-mongers suggest losing traffic to CDG, AMS etc but I would be more than happy to see a fleet of Emirates A380 operating hourly Emirates flights Ex Manchester if that is the way forward , that said, new government could do worse than look at the German model !

[wanna_be_there]

Bagso, some good points in there.

Firstly, true MUC does have more direct routes, but MAN/LHR cant really be compared to FRA/MUC because of the distances involved. Yes, MAN and LON are 2 seperate cities with their won seperate catchments, but LHR/MAN are much much closer together than MUC/FRA. It is so easy to hop on a plane direct to LHR, or with the rail improvements, now the train can be done quickly also.
With this, much of the MAN catchement can get on a direct intercontinental route with relative ease, and this will always be the issue.

The only way I can see MAN getting a 'piece of the pie' so to speak is the new ruling that allows no more growth in the south. Whatever people may think of MAN, it is in the best postition to accept new traffic, due to the fact T2 can handle many more daytime and nighttime flights, good all round transport links, large scale maintence facilities, cargo terminal, 2 runways, 3 terminals to choose from and so on.

Now, this regional arguement, I think this is where people get a little ahead of themselves. LON is the capital, Manchester is a region of the UK. Man is not the main UK airport so hence, is a regional airport. Even business thinks MAN is a regional:

Emirates: Manchester will become the world's first regional airport to have a regular A380 service
Man airport: Manchester airport is the busiest regional airport in the UK
Awards: Best UK Regional Airport in the Globe Travel Awards

These are taken from news sources, very easy to find on the interweb. MAN is a regional, and even if it grows to be the biggest in the UK, will always be a regional. Its nothing to be ashamed of, it doesnt mean we will be doomed to always wearing flat caps and owning whippets.

[AircraftOperations]

Thanks for that Betablocker. I guess if I had some MAN or Antonov ops contacts, I wouldn't need to ask here.
I was told that it departed to a UK airport, which sounds unusual - especially if it was empty coming in.
Thanks.

[OltonPete]

Is there any hint that 1/9/10 will bring an announcement of the third
daily service?

The three class version for a yield point of view is great assuming
there is plenty of take-up at full fare (rather than upgrades) but
without a third daily service surely EK are running the risk of handing
economy pax over to QR & EY?

Are they hoping that the overspill will book bhx/ncl?

If BHX gets two 442 seat 77W's (in reality it will be a mix of 427/428
and 442 no doubt) then there will be more capacity offered than at Manchester with its 517 and 364 seat offering.

With Manchester now over 50000 a month pax and the maximum capacity
around 54000 it does seem odd to risk pushing pax away although I
understand it is the front end which makes or breaks a service or it this
case, the upper deck!

Pete

[wanna_be_there]

Oltonpete

The 3rd daily is pencilled in for either March or May next year. EK has now got 2 problems now that the A380 is on the afternoon service:

-There is actually 1 less economy seat on the A380 than the current B77W, so obviously no increase in capacity for Y pax
-Cargo has taken a HUGE hit as the A388 isnt as capable of uplift as the B77W

Emirates is taking a huge gamble in upping MAN's premium service, sacrificing Y and Cargo loads for F/J, so I hope it pays off for them (Ive heard so far, it has)
The EK21/22 is pencilled for a 3 class B773 (not specifically for F uplift, but the fact it offers best cargo and Y increase compared to the A332), and last I heard was going to be a 0625a/0935d.
A year ago or so, the main man for EK did a talk to the TAS memebers at MAN, saying that on introduction of the A380, Skycargo would start a 4 weekly service. As it was a while ago now, I genuinly dont know the status of that plan.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Just a suggestion here that we don't get too hung up on the 'capital/regional' label. Many of the world's most successful airports are not capital city operations, eg. Chicago, Frankfurt, New York x 3, Sydney, Toronto, Atlanta, Milan, Zurich, Munich, Barcelona and many more.

What really counts is the business opportunity offered by the catchment area feeding a particular proposed route. The population density, the GDP of the region, ease of airport access, disproportionate ethnic demand for certain routes (eg. MAN-ISB). These are typical elements which airlines examine, not capital city status (although some capitals do offer an enhanced wow/glamour factor). Does anybody here expect Canberra, Bern, Ottawa, Cardiff (or even Washington DC) become global superhubs anytime soon? "Capital City" refers to the seat of political legislature and is just one factor in the attractiveness of an airport.

Many capital cities are superhubs, of course. London being a case in point. Perhaps it is more important to be the home base of a major airline, as is the case with LHR (BA) capital city, and FRA (LH) provincial city. The "capital" factor is not the overriding one, although taking the case of London in particular as a 'global city', there are many iconic tourist haunts, big business HQ's etc. related to capital status which boost its attractiveness. But the region surrounding MAN is also relatively prosperous by global standards and has much to commend it to airline companies.

But MAN's Achilles Heel is that it is not home-base to any major airline company. None of the major alliance groupings hub in any significant way at MAN. These are the true advantages which LHR, FRA, MUC, CDG etc hold over MAN. Note that two of those airports serve political seats of government and two do not. The "capital city/regional city" label is a sideshow distracting from the factors which actually drive airport success. MAN has many positive factors to commend it to the airlines. Unfortunately, being a major alliance hub is not one of them. That is why we will not match MUC's offerings in the foreseeable future. LH supports MUC as BA dismisses MAN.

SHED.

[Ian Brooks]

You should say Lufthansa supports MAN as BA dismisses MAN

Ian B

[jpthomas72]

Many of the world's most successful airports are not capital city operations (...) FRA, MUC (...) . Don't use German airports as an example though, this is a very long story and has mostly historical reasons (post-WWII). E.g. Munich was the capital of the Bavarian kingdom. Frankfurt nearly became the capital of West Germany, and is the financial powerhouse. Also, Berlin (with a little help from the Federal Government) is building the brand-new airport, which will overtake Dusseldorf, and maybe on the long run even Munich. Without WWII and the Wall, no doubt Berlin would have Germany's biggest airport. Stuttgart would be a remote village, all manufacturing would be in Berlin etc...

[AndyH52]

Shed, very true those aren't capital cities (though many are regional capitals within their countries) however with the notable exception of Frankfurt and Zurich the places you list all have a population in their metropolitan areas more than twice that of Manchester - in the case of New York (x 3?) nearly four times, another significant factor which airline route planners take in to account. They are also generally much further away from their nearest city 'competitors' and so have an even wider catchment area. By the time you throw in the fact that roughly 20% of the population live in the London metropolitan area the chances of securing a more extensive long haul network - or as you rightly point out a based long haul carrier - reduce even further. The advent of the B787 might help in the coming years but other regional airports may be hoping the same thing.

Changing subject, can anyone shed any light as to why the fire cover at MAN is only NOTAM'd as CAT 10 (i.e. sufficient to cover A380 ops) until late October? Surely it should be a permanent change - assuming the A380 operation isn't just seasonal?

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

jpthomas72 / AndyH52,

I am not in disagreement with you. Many airports serve cities which have substantial populations, administer a region, or have historical claims to capital city status. As do the German examples listed by jpthomas. But still, they are not capital cities today. That is the point. Whether or not they are the seat of government today is incidental for the purpose of exploring their potential for profitable air services. "Capital City" is a concept best left to politicians and their cronies. "Prosperous Conurbation" is of far more interest to the economics of the airline industry. And Greater Manchester is a prosperous conurbation supported by other similar population centres nearby. So lets not get distracted by the capital / regional labels. Successful airports can be located in both capital and provincial locations.

By the way, the New York x3 was not a reference to population size; I was alluding to its support of three major airports in JFK, LGA and EWR. I should have expressed that point more clearly.

Ian Brooks, you are right to acknowledge LH's support for MAN. Unfortunately, they do not currently offer a hub-and-spoke operation at MAN in the way they are able to do at MUC. That is not a criticism of them; it is simply the reality of the marketplace at the present time.

SHED.

[clareview]

Surely the issue is not whether a city is a capital, a regional centre or whatever but its ability to provide both inbound or outbound passengers in sufficient numbers in all cabins to make a decent profit - Canbera is a capital but the magnet in that part of Australia is Sydney, similarly Madrid is a capital but other spanish cities do nearly as well (sun, sea and sand).

Surely the issue for Manchester is, for regional routes, Liverpool nearby, and, as has been said, no airline or alliance using it as a hub? In addition, the fast train to London must be becoming more and more of an issue.

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Well put, Clareview. My point exactly. SHED.

[Bagso]

Emirates etc

Some very interesting and thought provoking comments re "shed" etc

I must confess I thought the prospect of a third daily EK would be overkill BUT there is just a chance that EK might infact be the saviour of Manchester.

The extra publicity that the A380 generates should theoretically be a really great platform for the airport to publicise and market long haul service via Dubai. Pity our new MD could not have been pitched in earlier to front this !

As I said previous if we cannot generate direct service I would gladly settle for an eventual hourly service to Dubai !

Pity they could not offer services to the US and Canada.....!

Just out of curiosity would this growth diminish if EK joined Star Alliance or OneWorld ?

Meanwhile maybe the term "Provincial Capital" could be used henceforth, somewhat "republican" but certainly sounds more 2010 than 1910 to me.....!

[ib26uk]

I`m going to along to MAN next week to see the Emirates A380 come in

Manchester Airport should be very proud of this amazing achievement :ok:

[Mr.Bloggs]

Saw quite a few 380's going about their business at LHR these last 2 days. Not exactly a miracle, just a big plane. MAN needs BA back, not EK.

[clareview]

You are right about North America lagging behind. It seems to me that there are places no bigger than Manchester that justify more long haul routes to the US e.g Dublin has EI to JFK, Chicago and Boston, Delta to JKF and Atlanta, Continental x 2 to Newark, US to Phil and American to Chicago (plus seasonal daily Air Canada and 4 per week seasonal Air Transat to Toronto). Remember Man has lost BA to JKF plus the various bmi routes (though I felt these always seemed a bit half hearted) plus much Canadian traffic.

Surely some of the huge North American market in the London area must be drawing people from the Northwest or are they all going via Ams - though the volume on that route might suggest otherwise?

[wanna_be_there]

MAN is probably just as well, or even better off than DUB, considering DUB DOES have a based scheduled airline.
The 2 routes DUB does have that MAN could use are BOS and YYZ on AC.
We have a US A333 to PHL (meaning US have more capacity ex-MAN than LHR), 2 daily CO, AA to JFK/ORD, DL to ATL/ATL, VS to MCO, BGI and LAS, EK to DXB with the A380, QR to DOH, EY to AUH, PK to ISB/LHE/JFK/KHI, SQ to SIN and so on long haul.
Also, LH has flights to BRU via SN/FRA/MUC/STR/CGN via 4U/HAM. Anyway, you get the picture.

Yes, MAN can do better, and MIA looks to be added by AA next winter, HKG is a route that could easily be filled and some euro gaps could be filled. But lets not take pity on MAN, for we have a very very enviable route structure.

[mickyman]

MrBloggs

I think you are the minority with that opinion! re: BA

MM

[Egerton Flyer]

MM

You wouldn't be taking the mickey by any chance :}
That's not like you.:rolleyes:

E.F.

[clareview]

wanna be there

My point is that Dub has a lot less of a catchment then Man so pro rata Dub is mcuh better served for North America than Man. Of course Dub only has Ethiad at 10 per week in terms of eastwards long haul.

[mickyman]

Egerton flyer

No I wasnt actually - the experience of having BA resident
at Manchester has not been a good one recently for a lot
of reasons and has been discussed on here alot.
Expressing a desire to see them back is not common amongst
posters from what I have read ie: a minority view.

Having retracted to its London bases I see no sense in reversing
that.

MM

[mickyman]

claireview

The DUB-USA axis is similar to the MAN-PAKISTAN one - just
on a bigger scale perhaps.
Given that Transatlantic travel from the 'regional' airports of the
U.K. is struggling for some ie:Birmingham fighting to keep Continental and
Bristol loosing their link,Manchester is perhaps poised to benefit
more from the 3rd runway cancellation,because it has managed to
maintain its links.

MM

[MUFC_fan]

It's very obvious that Emirates will need to increase their capacity to MAN. As people have said, they've reduced cargo capacity by a large amount (something which has kept SQ at MAN for god knows how long so obviously is very profitable!) so therefore either they need to increase cargo operations via SkyCargo or introduce a morning service.

I believe the latter will be the most effective. It simply needs more Y seats and cargo so therefore the 773/77W is the only option...

Regarding DUB, it is very unfair to compare MAN and DUB to the USA. DUB is pretty much 'mini-USA.'


Manchester is perhaps poised to benefit more from the 3rd runway cancellation,because it has managed to maintain its links.


I don't think even we realise how beneficial that is going to be to MAN...

[Ian Brooks]

Not a chance do we want BA back, all they ever did in last 30 years was try to spoil any other innovation by another operator, never anything off their own bat


Ian B

[wanna_be_there]

Regarding DUB, it is very unfair to compare MAN and DUB to the USA. DUB is pretty much 'mini-USA.

But thats the point I was trying to make. Considering Ireland/DUB's links with USA, and the fact LHR has a massive USA schedule, we are not too far off their offering:

DUB has 2 daily CO B757 to EWR, so does MAN.
DUB has 1 daily ORD B757 with AA, so does MAN
DUB has a daily ATL with DL on a B763, MAN will have the B764 for most of winter
DUB has daily JFK with DL, so does MAN.
DUB has 6 weekly (winter) B762 with US, we have daily A333
DUB has 5 weekly? A330 to MCO with EI, we will have 10 weekly A333/B744

Extras:
DUB has ORD/JFK/BOS with EI
MAN has LAS with VS and JFK with AA and PK. Also many more charters to SFB

Rumour wise:

UA to start ORD from MAN, US to start CLT on B762 from MAN and AA to start MIA from MAN.
US also rumoured from DUB with B752.

See, not that bad really. Seat wise, yes DUB probably has much more, but schedule wise, we certainly aint lagging behind!

[Mr A Tis]

Cathay seem to shift an awful lot of cargo out of MAN. Even with one of the highest Chinese populations in the UK, we still can't get a pax or combi flight direct to HKG or mainland China. You do wonder what it would take to get a pax flt.
What happened to the Air China Shanghai cargo flights?

[Bagso]

BA have just announced that they have upped their JFK service to an hourly service at 7 a day, just curious about UA, AA CO etc

In relation to Manchester the New York area is possibly one of the few destinations where the % number of flights offered does at least bare some semblance to the potential traffic available ex Manchester.

Just out of curiosity does anybody have a "straightforward list" of frequency to other major destinations Ex Heathrow?

Eg JFK, HK etc

[Skipness One Echo]

My point is that Dub has a lot less of a catchment then Man so pro rata Dub is mcuh better served for North America than Man. Of course Dub only has Ethiad at 10 per week in terms of eastwards long haul.

Boston and New York have massive ex-pat Irish populations so that's to be expected. There's more to a market comparison than simplisticly comparing the size of the catchment area.

UA to start ORD from MAN, US to start CLT on B762 from MAN and AA to start MIA from MAN.
US also rumoured from DUB with B752.

US already fly DUB-PHL on the B757 and as for MAN-CLT on the B767, I doubt that. Beside the fact the B767s are coming off the Atlantic routes to be replaced by the A330-200.
The AA is a RE-START of a seasonal winter service that we've seen before though and I wouldn't be surprised to see return.

BA have just announced that they have upped their JFK service to an hourly service at 7 a day, just curious about UA, AA CO etc

In relation to Manchester the New York area is possibly one of the few destinations where the % number of flights offered does at least bare some semblance to the potential traffic available ex Manchester.

Just out of curiosity does anybody have a "straightforward list" of frequency to other major destinations Ex Heathrow?

I do.

LHR-JFK
AA 4 x B772
BA 6 x B744 / B772
DL 2 x B764
VS 3 x A346 / B744
KU ? x B772

From 2010W add one each to BA and DL

LHR-EWR
BA 3 x B772 / B763
VS 2 x A346 / A343
CO 4 x B772 / B772

Giving a rough total of 27 flight London - New York if you throw in the two BA A318s at City.

LHR-HKG

CX 4 x B744 / B77W
VS 1 x A346
NZ 1 x B772
QF 1 x B744
BA 3 x B744

Giving 10 daily London - Hong Kong.

It's not a good comparison with MAN as LHR is the biggest hub in Europe and so is not just working on the London population.


Manchester is perhaps poised to benefit more from the 3rd runway cancellation,because it has managed to maintain its links.
It's more of a postponement. Give them time to see how many villages and areas of outstanding natural beauty their multi-billion dollar railway will scythe it's way through at £££ per mile and the fact that they casn't just shift capacity to a full LGW or a distant STN. It will happen later rather than sooner but it's gonna come.

[Jamie2k9]

US already fly DUB-PHL on the B757

US use a B767 on the route and they will keep the B767 on the route during the winter (B757 winter 09)

DUB has 1 daily ORD B757 with AA
AA use a B767 on the route but they are dropping the route for the winter but it will resume in March 2011.

Of course Dub only has Ethiad at 10 per week in terms of eastwards long haul.

It wont be long until EY put a B777 or more flights with the A330.

DUB also have flights to Tel Aviv.

UA to start ORD from MAN, US to start CLT on B762 from MAN and AA to start MIA from MAN. US also rumoured from DUB with B752.

Is this to start flights to CLT from DUB.

[mickyman]

Skipness

I also think you will see the third runway at lhr - but not given the
go-ahead until nearer this governments first term end.

MM

[Ian Brooks]

No 3rd runway at Lhr while Con/Libs in as neither want it


Ian

[mickyman]

Ian Brooks

Yeah that may be the case for the time being but when
doners begin to pressure anything is possible.
As Heathrow 'bloats' on services this pressure will come
from all angles - just give it a little time.
and hey! its decision time,what they gonna do?
No-brainer or should that be a Yesbrainer!!

Until that time I think Manchester will benefit a little from the situation.

MM

[Hamburg 2K8]

Right so 1 week to go and the beautiful bird will be at MAN, can't wait! I used to see A380s everyday when I worked in Hamburg (For Airbus UK), have been in MSN 0003 (Signapore Airlines) in 2007 but never flew in one.

So can someone confirm in summary what is left to do with regards to operations for the A380s first visit? The 2 airbridges have been installed, have they been tested? Has gate 12 in pier b all been re-decorated, a complete refurb of the whole pier b is needed! I take it the airport must of spent a lot for the ground ops etc? New vechiles to reach the passenger doors for catering etc. How long will it take to re-fuel the A380? Will this be performed as per the current method of re-fuelling A/C or another way?

And finally, has anyone any pics of stand 12 inside and/or out? I'm at MAN on Saturday for the aviation fair so take it will see some of the stand from the AVP?

Sorry for all the questions, I'm just so looking forward to it's arrival at my local regional airport.

[bjones4]

And finally, has anyone any pics of stand 12 inside and/or out? I'm at MAN on Saturday for the aviation fair so take it will see some of the stand from the AVP?
I meant to take some on Sunday but I got distracted by a noisy Russian... Yes you can easily see stand 12 from the RVP.

[HXdave]

i'm watching her come in from T3 on wednesday.........

[learjet50]

Hamburg 2K8

A rather unusal question re re fuelling

How do you think it will be re fuelled {Over wing with ladders up to the wings like we used to re fuel DC6 s ??

The re fuelling is the least of the issues re Turnarounds

Hook up the Hose X 2 to the underwing the engineers / Crew tell u

Please refuel to XXXXX Tons/Kilos Set the appropriate gauge or whatever then Who eeee Crew requested XXX Tons A/C hax XXX tons Please sign Fuel fuel chit for XXXXXXX Litres Fuel Chit signed.


Crew Happy Fuel Company Happy


I dont want to become a Walter Meldrew on this But its an A/C
Big Bigger than normal but an A/C

[Shed-on-a-Pole]

Eh? Is that a cross between a Walter Mitty and a Victor Meldrew?

[learjet50]

Soory Shed


Its Victor who cannot spell sorry


Keep smiling u av 2

[mickyman]

Sorry was Ronnie Corbett wasnt it ?

MM

[Skipness One Echo]

I used to see A380s everyday when I worked in Hamburg (For Airbus UK), have been in MSN 0003 (Signapore Airlines) in 2007 but never flew in one.

Tried the Air France A380 on LHR-CDG for a weekend away.
Inside they're 10 abreast cattle cattle class for most of us with a wing so enormous, if you want to see out you need to pick your seat with care. The windows are quite large but a little distant so you can sleep against the wall like on a smaller aircraft. Taking photos through the window is a challenge! I was downstairs but I imagine upstairs will be awesome. I was late checking in so missed the chance to try it.

the beautiful bird will be at MAN, can't wait!
She's lovely on the inside but as to the exterior :

Welcome to Specsavers (http://www.specsavers.com)

She's the classic fat friend we all love but wouldn't date. (Can I say that? Probably not..... )

[750XL]

Both bridges are fully installed and ready and have been tested on the ground believe.

A 777 (I assume EK?) will be put on stand 12 tomorrow to fully test the airbridges on an aircraft :ok:

Probably the only two bridges in the airport which work properly :}

[Hamburg 2K8]

Thanks for all the comments. Will the 017/018 Emirtes B777 service be using stand 12 all the time from 1st sep too?

Suppose the T2 & 3 airbridges are ok compared to T1? I read somewhere that late this year/early next year some of the T1 stands are getting new airbridges? They all seem to be working at all terminals whenever I have been at MAN. Does the airport have the finance avilable to replace all airbridges that need urgentley replacing, take it that would be most of them?

[wanna_be_there]

Will the 017/018 Emirtes B777 service be using stand 12 all the time from 1st sep too?

The evening B777 service is actually the EK19/20, the EK17/18 is the A380 service. In answer the the question, yes it will be using stand 12.

[Hamburg 2K8]

Thanks wanna be there. Sorry for the error in flight numbers.

[conti onepass]

jet2 have added more new routes from manchester.

[wanna_be_there]

Yep Brieve a new route for MAN, but LCA/PFO are hardly setting the scene on fire.

Also increasing its Venice service from four to six flights per week, Nice from five to six flights per week and adding additional flights to Majorca on Saturdays and Murcia on Sundays.

As this is from summer 2011, Im assuming either another based unit or reduction in other flights?

[airhumberside]

TFS/ACE loose a weekly flight but otherwise everything else is no change or expansion. So must be another based aircraft for MAN

[MAN777]

If you are stuck for something to do this weekend there is a fair on at the viewing park, loads of cockpits and vintage cars coming and a running Rolls Royce Griffon engine !!!!:O:O

[wanna_be_there]

well, im guessing that as there are no tales of exploding jetbridges, nor emirates pax trip reports stating they couldnt get to gate 12 due the mass of jet2/monarch pax with huge families donning their rubber rings, that the test on gate 12 with the EK17/18 went well?

what will all the doom mongers talk about now?

On the funny side, the markings on the ground of stand 12 indicate a stop line for an A380, B773 and a B346. Wonder what type of aircraft the B346 is?

[Hamburg 2K8]

Yes, I take it things went well or ok if no-one has yet commented on any bad points?!

But as someone previously posted on this forum, stands 10 & (I think it was) are not in use when the A380 is on stand 12, A/C can park at the gates but no boarding will be taking place therefore no passengers at the gates in pier b, so shouldn't be to bad, well not as bad as further down at gates 1-9 eh?!

[Hamburg 2K8]

I also meant Stand 11 too, which Ryanair always use, but don't think their is a FR flight in when EK A380 is in??? Sure they won't be arse if another Pier B gate is avilable (3, 5, 7 or 9)

[Ringwayman]

Today FR554 arrived whilst EK17 was in. Virgin is gonig to be operating 2 weekly to Barbados again from November 2011. Hopefully they should be able to make it last as there should be fewer problems with availability of aircraft.

[learjet50]

Wanna be there

Would the marking on stand 12 be wrong do they mean A346
which would be logical I dont know why but a thought



Regards

Gezza

[Ringwayman]

The marking's been altered to A346. Which poses the following possibilities: A346 for Etihad. 777s for Qatar, Etihad and Emirates?

[Hamburg 2K8]

Evening all!

Took a trip to MAN today, had a nosey around the airport, the pub and the AVP (I know that AVP is not correct, can't remember what it is now) and had a great day, despite the sunshine and heavy showers! I think it was about 2.30-3.00PM a 757 Jet 2 was taxing towards 23R passing T3 and it made a left turn, looked like it was going to dock at a stand at T3 but then it turned around facing towards T1 and was stationary for about 20mins, beacon light was still on and couldn't see anyone or any vechiles around it, it eventually departed. Any idea what was up?

Also, I see part of thr cargo centre has had a make over from the outside, looks much more modern, are they doing the rest too? What's going on with all the tractors parked near the fire station? I see it's all cornered off.

[BookEm]

The Jet 2 757 was just waiting for its slot time. Nothing more exciting I'm afraid.

[lasernigel]

Surely some of the huge North American market in the London area must be drawing people from the Northwest or are they all going via Ams - though the volume on that route might suggest otherwise?

I've worked for Californian based companies for 24yrs now. I used to do the via LHR or AMS routes. Won't fly BA or KLM now if I can help it. So last month was via ATL to SJC. Way back via JFK as went to friends in Maryland for a few days.
Surely there is demand for a 3 - 5 times a week direct to SFO? See so many passengers who are going that way too.

[Hamburg 2K8]

Something else I noticed on Saturday, at the end of 23R the holding point was not in use, work seemed to had taken place there, is that related to the A380?

A friend of mine is going to Heraklion in Crete tomorrow with Monarch, unsure of the departure time, but anyone know which A/C it will be?

[Hamburg 2K8]

Did the LS 757 miss it's slot? If A/C are waiting for their slot, can't they stay at the gate?

[ib26uk]

I`m coming to MAN on Wednesday to see the Emirates A380

Does anybody know where the best place to be to see it land will be

Was thinking either on Level 13 or at the aviation viewing park ?????

Also I will be there between 11am and 4pm - Anybody know if I will be likely to catch sight of any easyJet aircraft during that time??

Thanks :ok:

[TSR2]

Yes you will see at least 4 EZY arrivals and 4 departures in that time period. Please be advised that the AVP (or whatever its current name), is expecting large crowds on Wednesday.

[j4ckos mate]

I went to the airport hotel today, i was surprised to see an md11,(world aireays)
was it operating on a charter flight for someone, and why did the fire engines follow it down the runway ?

[planenutter]

Hi there,

the reason for the "un frequent" World Airways MD-11 landing today was because the pilots saw smoke it the cockpit and made a full emergency landing, descending vey steeply so they could get on the ground ASAP. This was the reason for the Fire engines aswell

Hope this helped you out

thanks, planenutter

[Suzeman]

Did the LS 757 miss it's slot? If A/C are waiting for their slot, can't they stay at the gate?

Actual Departure time is when the aircraft leaves the gate. Pushing on time and then holding somewhere convienient and out of the way to absorb an ATC delay means an "on time" departure as far the stats are concerned. In addition the stand may have been required for something else. BA used to do this regularly with their first early wave of European departures which were frequently delayed because of flow management slots.

Some airports also charge for parking on the stand from chocks on to chocks off. However Manchester's aircraft parking charges seem to be levied from touchdown to take-off.

The work between JA and J has been extended until end Sept - was supposed be mid August. Don't know why

) EGCC B) 1008270808 C) 1009301600
E) TWY J CLSD BTN J1-JA. ACFT LDG RWY 05L UNABLE TO VACATE AT OR
BEFORE JA ARE TO BACKTRACK AS DIRECTED. ACFT DEP RWY 23R ARE TO ENTER VIA JA (TORA 2567M). ACFT REQUIRING FULL LENGTH DEP (2897M) ARE TO BACKTRACK NOTIFYING ATC ON CTC WITH GND MOVEMENT CONTROL. FULL LENGTH DEP NOT AVBL WITH IRVR LESS THAN 350M.
SUP 026/2010 REFERS
CREATED: 27 Aug 2010 08:09:00


Suzeman

[HXdave]

IB26UK, if you are going to the AVP by car, you need to pre-book or you will not get in. also, if you are going into the airport car park to watch for that length of time, dont forget to re-mortgage your house, as car parking charges are astronimical..............