Southampton-2

[The Nutts Mutts]

Eastern's latest schedule update has Teesside still starting on the 7th September, but initially only once daily instead of twice. Leeds will remain once daily on that date instead of the previous increase to 3x daily, which always seemed optimistic.
Personally I'd much prefer to see the routes returning at lower frequencies than being delayed or not returning at all so I'm fairly happy with today's update. Teesside will add another daily destination on the departures board.

[Albert Hall]

Personally I'd much prefer to see the routes returning at lower frequencies than being delayed or not returning at all

Yes and no, perhaps.

Would they not be better doing one thing well (SOU-MME-ABZ) instead of two things badly (SOU-MME and SOU-NCL)?

I'm assuming there must be a reason they don't, but I don't know what that reason is.

SOU-BHD sounds to be doing OK for them, unlike MAN which is decidedly hit and miss.

[JSCL]

I’m hearing a lot about potential alliance / tie-up between the likes of BI and Loganair, possibly with Stobart/EIR too as a regional network alliance. This will leave Eastern on their own fighting the group of them, so they need to get this right and win the business for the long term now.

[allan1987]

I’m hearing a lot about potential alliance / tie-up between the likes of BI and Loganair, possibly with Stobart/EIR too as a regional network alliance. This will leave Eastern on their own fighting the group of them, so they need to get this right and win the business for the long term now.

There might be a tie up with Eastern and Stobart with a code share with BA and EI , This would explain where the 2 E190's and 2 ATRs are coming from. Would also help with the flights from Teesside to Heathrow

[Rivet Joint]

Rivet Joint...

BE POLITE...Because you lose or are exposed by the arguments & discussions try not be childish with user names please.

Believe it or not it was an honest spelling mistake, so apologies if offence was taken.

I admit as far as the economy etc goes my comments are a bit on the optimistic side. Things always recover though, so there is no reason SOU cannot look forward to a bright future. It is important to remember that until SOU has had the benefit of significant investment to make it able to cater for larger aircraft and loads, its potential cannot be judged.There are so many things in the local area that would create a market for a sizable low cost carrier operator. You cannot compare previous airlines that use small planes and charge hundreds of pounds for the privilege. Most people who currently fly from SOU do so purely based on convenience. Pay quite a bit more but it's less hassle. Once the playing field is fair, do you think the numerous people who fly from LGW, LHR, LTN and STN because the flights are cheaper will still do so when tickets can be had at the same price from SOU? Especially when there is a train station across the road avoiding the need for the expense of parking on top of the long drive? Not to mention having its own motorway junction. Everything is in place for SOU when it comes to connectivity, and the there is a market ready to be tapped. The drawback has always been air-side investment, which is finally happening, so yes it is a time to be positive.

[Asturias56]

Why would anyone make a sizable investment at Southampton - it was just about holding on but long term the convenience factor was slowly being eroded by the economics of larger aircraft out of LGW or LHR

A major physical expansion was impossible at any airfield in the UK pre CV19 - after I think there will be a big shrinkage in flights and airports

[RW20]

Why would anyone make a sizable investment at Southampton - it was just about holding on but long term the convenience factor was slowly being eroded by the economics of larger aircraft out of LGW or LHR

A major physical expansion was impossible at any airfield in the UK pre CV19 - after I think there will be a big shrinkage in flights and airports
Absolutely right!, the best SOU can do is hang on,but the longer the covid 19 crisis goes on, then the possibility of some airfields like Southhampton being unprofitable greatly increase.
As such Southampton must be on an increasing list of fields that could close,and the valuable land used for development. The Runway extension is now an irrelevant side issue,that almost certainly will be referred to an extended review.

[SWBKCB]

Right, so the economic crisis continues making the airport unprofitable, but it's not so bad that the land becomes valuable for development?

[SKOJB]

The airport will bounce back that I am confident of and the runway extension will be passed at local level or if not by central government. As for its long term future, that will depend on holidays abroad becoming the norm once more as U.K. business connectivity is probably to a large extent now a think of the past, not withstanding family and friends still wishing to travel domestically. All is not lost and currently the airport sits in a similar if not slightly more encouraging position than many other regionals!

[EI-BUD]

There is a great business case for extending the runway at Southampton. It's been in the region of 2M pax and just before that in 2019, that's based on a limited route network operated by Dash8 and a token presence of a low cost jet operator.

Just taking a look at key towns/cities close by we are looking at 1million people. Gatwick is 87 miles away and Bristol just over 100. Let's not forget it's possible that a, meaningful operation could draw users from South London and the surrounding counties.

The cruise business will recover, this drives significant volume into SOU, the port also generates traffic.

If I were running SOU, post expansion (not discounting the challenges of expansion) I'd be aiming for 5M pax plus, a presence by a low cost airline, I'd not rule out Wizz and the likes of Jet2, would make a lot of sense.

[rog747]

There is a great business case for extending the runway at Southampton. It's been in the region of 2M pax and just before that in 2019, that's based on a limited route network operated by Dash8 and a token presence of a low cost jet operator.

Just taking a look at key towns/cities close by we are looking at 1million people. Gatwick is 87 miles away and Bristol just over 100. Let's not forget it's possible that a, meaningful operation could draw users from South London and the surrounding counties.

The cruise business will recover, this drives significant volume into SOU, the port also generates traffic.

If I were running SOU, post expansion (not discounting the challenges of expansion) I'd be aiming for 5M pax plus, a presence by a low cost airline, I'd not rule out Wizz and the likes of Jet2, would make a lot of sense.


A lot of sense, with the greatest of respect is to have a runway that could even accept Jet2 or Wizz...
They have 737-800 and A321 - both of which cannot, even with a 164m runway tag on operate economically safely or payload unrestricted in or out of SOU.
If you want FR Jet2 or anyone with a 738 or an A321 you need quite a bit more than 164m....and that means likely tunnelling the M27 lol
That is not gonna happen is it now.

As I and others have mentioned here of late the need for the businessmen and connectivity point to point flights all hopefully will resume one day in good numbers.
(it has started off well but sadly delays due to yet more covid quarantine issues which have delayed more and more of the start ups)

We've got back The C.I, EDI MAN NCL DUB BFS LBA ABZ - we do need AMS & DUB to get on track asap plus CDG

TUI may come back in summer 2021 for Majorca but who knows - they say they are for now....
We have lost all other IT work - Inghams Lakes & Mountains had Verona twice a week - that has gone - will it ever come back?
SOU and its previous airlines did not really tap into the then booming Cruise ship business - that ship has sunk for now.........
GVA ski flights next winter ? - well we hope we can all got to the slopes in France and Switzerland by then - but you cannot now though....

So, going back to what if you were running SOU - well what now?
lol (I'm only teasing)

[The Nutts Mutts]

A lot of sense, with the greatest of respect is to have a runway that could even accept Jet2 or Wizz...
They have 737-800 and A321 - both of which cannot, even with a 164m runway tag on operate economically safely or payload unrestricted in or out of SOU.
If you want FR Jet2 or anyone with a 738 or an A321 you need quite a bit more than 164m....and that means likely tunnelling the M27 lol
That is not gonna happen is it now.


With all due respect, are you able to produce valid performance figures to back up those statements? If SOU gets a 164m extension and the tree obstacles on the runway 20 climbing are removed, then my understanding from what I've been told is that economic 738 operations would become possible, particularly with the SFP model.

It's an argument that's often trotted out on this thread as yet another nail in the coffin for SOU (and depending on who's posts you read, there can appear to be many, many nails). What I'd like to see though is for a real pilot (are there any on this section of pprune?) to run the performance figures for a 1887m runway with no significant obstacles and then show their working, along with an indication of how far they could carry a commercially viable load from that runway. That would hopefully put the argument to bed one way or another.

[bad bear]

I think there is also a problem with the width of the runway being only 37 m wide that also causes problems and requires crew training and flight manual changes (also to the MEL)

[bad bear]

While there is a bit of a recovery in the aviation industry it worth noting that Southampton have 5 arrivals today compared to Gatwicks 140 and Heathrow have too many to count.

[Planespeaking]

I think there is also a problem with the width of the runway being only 37 m wide that also causes problems and requires crew training and flight manual changes (also to the MEL)
SEN also has a non-standard runway width I believe of 37m, however it operates A320s and B737-400 and 800s quite successfully.

[TCAS FAN]

While there is a bit of a recovery in the aviation industry it worth noting that Southampton have 5 arrivals today compared to Gatwicks 140 and Heathrow have too many to count.
....and NWI have 2, EXT have 3 and BOH have 4. Out of the four of them I've a good idea who is going to recover first!

[stewyb]

....and NWI have 2, EXT have 3 and BOH have 4. Out of the four of them I've a good idea who is going to recover first!

Spot on, don't see any relevance whatsoever in bad bears comment. SOU is making the best of an unparalleled situation and re-building rather well with the upcoming months looking positive with increased frequencies on most airlines and KLM going x 2 daily with a E90 (all subject to industry change of course!)

[adfly]

On a related note, I wonder when they plan to open some of the food outlets and shops in the airport again. There are a few comments on social media about people having to go hungry as nothing is currently available. Surely with ~500 passengers now departing and arriving on weekdays it is economical to at least have something open - somewhere like Costa probably does just enough food to fill the hole for now. Maybe somewhere will open the week after next when KLM start on 31/08, when there will be more passengers at the start or end of potentially much longer journeys than now.

[rog747]

Yes old chap - Mr MOL himself said just a few months ago ''Ryanair will not be going to SOU as our planes are TOO BIG''

That really does more or less suggest that line closes the debate on 737-800 Ops at SOU UFN.
We have gone round and round on this to the point now of delusion & delirium. LOL.

In addition to that I do have a few B738 Driver Pals who all know the issues with it's limitations into small or restrictive airfields, we have had plenty of dinner party discussions. Not just on SOU, but GIB and even BRS too.

SEN is NOT SOU....

I am not nailing any SOU coffins - I am future upbeat (as I have said before) about the recent Connectivity route progress that SOU and the Airlines seem to be getting underway with some progress but with also so much continuing duress.

BTW -
Jet2 TUI and EZY for that matter are all clinging to life right now so any suggestions that might include SOU Bases or even Operations are way off...
If anyone has heard concrete evidence that WIZZ are looking at SOU then I would be a little surprised

[rog747]

On a related note, I wonder when they plan to open some of the food outlets and shops in the airport again. There are a few comments on social media about people having to go hungry as nothing is currently available. Surely with ~500 passengers now departing and arriving on weekdays it is economical to at least have something open - somewhere like Costa probably does just enough food to fill the hole for now. Maybe somewhere will open the week after next when KLM start on 31/08, when there will be more passengers at the start or end of potentially much longer journeys than now.


Food would be good, as would be a Car Hire desk that stays open for the flights (Hopefully both will come soon)
We just about have a train service...

With the rise in Quarantine Countries escalating now to include almost all of the Low Countries has, or will KLM put back the AMS start date>?
Likewise DUB too...
And I guess no CDG taker as yet...

Are quarantine rules still in force for the Channel Islands for now - is it both ways? Different rules it seems for JER and GCI

All of these are hurdles facing not just SOU but we hope these will pass..............

[southside bobby]

MoL back in the day informed everyone that he would never operate to Poland!!...Eventually becoming by far & away the largest operator between the UK & Poland.

[Saabdriver1]

The runway width isn't really an issue - LCY is 30 metres wide and there are many airports through the Greek islands like JMK, JSI, JTR which are 30m wide and comfortably handling large aircraft like 737s, A320s and 757s. The main thing you have to watch is the reaction time in the event of an engine failure at/close to V1 is very short to keep the aircraft on the runway with asymmetric thrust. Some operators impose lower crosswind limits for narrow runways with this being a key reason. 37m width at SOU imposes no limitations for narrowbody operations.

A combination of length and performance-limiting obstacles are the main problems at SOU. The E145 cannot take a full load and becomes seriously limiting on a wet runway even on arrival. The ATR72 also has limits on departure off 02 under certain conditions. The deforestation (read "tree felling" to normal folk) exercise on Marlhill Copse removes a lot of the obstacles and will improve the limits for those operators impacted by them today. With the extension added, I'd be very surprised if it didn't make operations with the likes of the 738 and 320 possible with a full payload and a decent Med-type fuel load - you might perhaps struggle to get a 738 off to the Canaries, Sharm or Cyprus with a full load and the extra fuel, but I think that's a long way off in the distance!. Quite a lot of reasonably successful airports have performance limitations - departures off 32 at LBA being an obvious one that springs to mind, and getting off 03 at ACE is another one. Although everyone would prefer no limitations, you've only got to reduce the issues to a point where commercial operations are viable, and not necessarily remove every last limitation of any description.

[southside bobby]

So a quick check on the Arrivals Board for this afternoon at EXT reveals a TOM arrival so possibly a B738...& Bournemouth reveals 4 x RYR B738 arrivals together with a TOM this afternoon.
The very type utilized being described here in an earlier post as "a terrible a/c...ancient/unsophisticated & a cheap workhorse".
Providing business for other Regionals though it does appears.

[Dropoffcharge]

Exactly why a previous post of one airport has X amount of movements per day and the other has X, isn't an accurate account of things. There are far too many variables of aircraft type, pax loads, yields to make any assumptions as to how well one airport is currently (or will be) doing compared to another.

[southside bobby]

Pointing out the utilization of the B738 model as it has been denigrated on here is all.

[The Nutts Mutts]

On a related note, I wonder when they plan to open some of the food outlets and shops in the airport again. There are a few comments on social media about people having to go hungry as nothing is currently available. Surely with ~500 passengers now departing and arriving on weekdays it is economical to at least have something open - somewhere like Costa probably does just enough food to fill the hole for now. Maybe somewhere will open the week after next when KLM start on 31/08, when there will be more passengers at the start or end of potentially much longer journeys than now.

WH Smith airside reopened this week. Not sure when the rest will follow.

[shamrock7seal]

Before I say anything can I just remind everyone that I am a supporter of SOU as I have family in the catchment. It's convenient for them and I. I use it a lot to get to them.

Wizzair

Wizzair are launching a LGW base. There is no-way they will now launch a SOU base or even a SOU operation when LGW are trying desperately to fill the void left by others - the airport deals will be too attractive. It would dilute their LGW operation to start routes from SOU. Wizzair's attempt to start 'overflow' routes from SEN (as they couldn't get more slots at LTN, STN or LGW) is now stalled because the market has completely altered itself for the medium term. This is why it's going to take years before SOU sees 2019 levels of passenger numbers; and then it will take years to go above that level. Wizzair, in time, are far more likely to open a BRS or CWL base ahead of SOU for the South West catchment. LTN and LGW have North, South and West London catchments (which includes Southampton) areas covered.

Do existing operators need a runway extension?

Yes, but the airport MD keeps saying he wants 737's and A320's. Talk about mixed messages! If they focused the message on existing operators it's far more likely to garner support and a green light. Stop talking about attracting LCC's and larger aircraft which is throwing the conversation off track and causing concern on environmental issues and noise.

easyJet

It's already been mentioned so I don't need to repeat that easyJet are closing bases, not opening new ones. But I wonder why easyJet is not making a huge song and dance over supporting SOU with the extension? I haven't heard a peep from easyJet on this issue. This also reveals their true intention for SOU in the long-term. It is most likely not a priority and I would hazard a guess that the true issue is commercial performance rather than 'operational' performance. The SOU-GVA route seems fine at a frequency of a few times a week but why is SOU-GVA not daily or double daily (or even three times daily) like BRS or BHX etc? It's most likely because of its proximity to the London airports and their drastically low fares pulling people out of their catchment. This drastically reduces the options for a based LCC operator at SOU because it means less aircraft and therefore higher costs.

Finally - airport fees and charges

Would an extension mean lower airport charges? I don't think so - they are going to spend a significant amount just at a time when they have massive revenue short-falls. And because SOU has limited other businesses at the airport other than a commercial scheduled operation they can't recover this investment elsewhere.

[BHX5DME]

Wizz looking to put 20 aircraft in Gatwick within one year - slots permitting
So little chance of SOU getting anything IMHO

[Buster the Bear]

Volotea would seem a natural fit. No bases within the UK yet. Mind you post pandemic, there are going to be some really attractive airports with plentiful slots, so Southampton remaining open and viable is the first strep,

[rog747]

Volotea would seem a natural fit. No bases within the UK yet. Mind you post pandemic, there are going to be some really attractive airports with plentiful slots, so Southampton remaining open and viable is the first strep,

Volotea besides being the contracted charter carrier out SOU of TUI for their package holidays now only to Majorca for past the past few years (also IBZ and MAH but those got cancelled)

Volotea did try in summer 2016 with SOU as one of their own sell-able low-cost scheduled destinations (not charters, which were still being flown for TUI Holidays) but sadly this twice weekly flight to Palma did not last long...even with fares starting at £21.99
Flybe was still flying to Palma then too, as was TUI who were selling both packages and flight onlys on their own Volotea charters...

Since then Volotea have not touched the UK, but decided to branch out on the Greek Islands domestic market from ATH, along with their France & Italy Ops.
Fingers burnt I guess...
They are usually cheap, and sort of cheerful but their track record with UK customers leaves a lot to be desired and their name is not up there at the top.

[bad bear]

of course the other problem with Southampton is that its not only a narrow runway but its not aligned with the prevailing winds, today would be rather interesting throwing a heavy 320 at that runway in the wet with currently a near limiting cross wind, not far to divert to Bournemouth though with a longer into wind runway. the cross wind also comes from the "bad" side mostly leading to more unstable approaches and go arounds

[SKOJB]

If there is anything positive to be said about the airport, please do drop this thread a line!

[TCAS FAN]

If there is anything positive to be said about the airport, please do drop this thread a line!

Pleasure to - SOU has the advantage of a free CAT III equipped diversion airport about a 35 minute drive away!

[sambatc]

of course the other problem with Southampton is that its not only a narrow runway but its not aligned with the prevailing winds, today would be rather interesting throwing a heavy 320 at that runway in the wet with currently a near limiting cross wind, not far to divert to Bournemouth though with a longer into wind runway. the cross wind also comes from the "bad" side mostly leading to more unstable approaches and go arounds

Winds today are pretty much down the runway, have you looked at the METARs?

[Rivet Joint]

of course the other problem with Southampton is that its not only a narrow runway but its not aligned with the prevailing winds, today would be rather interesting throwing a heavy 320 at that runway in the wet with currently a near limiting cross wind, not far to divert to Bournemouth though with a longer into wind runway. the cross wind also comes from the "bad" side mostly leading to more unstable approaches and go arounds

Jesus, you glass half full lot are really clasping at straws now aren't you? Perhaps you could all explain why LM, BI and T3 are all climbing over each other to operate from SOU when the "superior" BOH is down the road? Wasn't the argument that BE having its large base at SOU stopped other airlines from operating at BOH? So surely when BE collapsed these other operators would have a clean slate to operate from the "superior" BOH? The reality is not a single operator has even touched the "superior" BOH since BEs demise, yet all three regional airlines have opened routes from SOU. Even KLM are coming back double daily. Why not BOH now BEs AMS route is no more? Why did EZY open a GVA route from SOU in competition with BE when it already operated the route from the "superior" BOH? The fact's don't lie.

In fact, if you want to take a look at an airport with great facilities and that had tons of money thrown at it look up Ciudad Real Central Airport which is just outside Madrid. Despite its big runway and all its investment it is currently used as an aircraft graveyard. Remind you of anywhere?

The really pathetic part about this wave of negativity is that it is largely just an excuse for grown adults to get a kick out of winding other people up, in other words trolling. Some of you really need to take a hard look in the mirror if that is how you chose to spend your time.

[RW20]

Rivet Joint
You really need to calm down and to take a chill pill! Bournemouth Runway ,landing aids,and extensive opening hours are a major asset. SOU runway limitations ,airside lack of development and reliance on domestic routes presents a major challenge to future operations. Many contributors to this blog have stated the obvious,and that is Easy,Wizz etc are going to go concentrate on London operations,SOU will not figure in there plans.Bournemouth will survive this aviation crisis due to its assets,SOU even with a runway extension will flounder,as many commuters work from home rather then take the plane. Time will tell,but you need to get out of the Southampton fantasy bubble and face the reality of the aviation crisis.

[SWBKCB]

Shall we wait for the planning decision on the runway extension, or continue to go round in ever decreasing circles? :ok:

[Flitefone]

Meanwhile, life goes on.

The aviation industry is in the midst of its biggest ever existential crisis. As things stand today, IATA are expecting recovery to 2019 levels around 2025, others have different views. Paris Airports for instance expect recovery by 2027. The generally accepted rate of recovery around the industry is building this year from -50 to 60% below 2019 traffic, rising to -30% in 2021, -10-15% in 2022 and so on. Of course no one knows for sure.

Many airlines and airports have had little or no income for six months, they are bleeding cash at unsustainable levels, there is a very real prospect that more will go bust and disappear this winter, meanwhile, those with a good balance sheet will expand into the gaps arising. Just as at SOU routes vacated by Flybe are being picked up by others - but for the foreseeable future at a much reduced capacity. LGW for instance is likely to see more Ryanair and Wizz, taking advantage of the doubts about return of Virgin, Norwegian and others.

The financial press is reporting that distressed airlines and airports are selling assets to raise cash, such as sale and lease back of aircraft, buildings, aircraft engines and land. Terminals are being closed and mothballed around the world.

For most regional airports in the UK and elsewhere, survival is the objective for at least the next two years, then recovery. Investment on the other hand is a long way off. The only thing that airports can currently control is cost, they have no significant ability to drive revenue for which many are certainly desperate.

In the meantime, airports are running on skeleton staffing levels, thousands of airport staff have already been made redundant in the UK alone. Not to mention the airline redundancies and those in air traffic control. Domestic and leisure travel is expected to lead the recovery when it comes.... so, if you want to support your local airport, there is only one strategy that might work; USE IT... or perhaps more than ever before, you will lose it!

FF

[gkmeech]

I think we should wait , could not agree more

2 posters on here are seriously becoming a pain to read and damaging the whole thread with bullying and opinionated posts both to each other and other regular posters in a roundabout way

Just stop it now ...,

Any chance that admin could get rid of the two teenage tantrum-throwers. They are getting seriously annoying and contributing nothing constructive to this thread.

[bad bear]

Airbus aircraft A318/A319/A320/A321 with a MTOW<68T are compatible with 30m wide runways as per ICAO. However, due to Airbus practices to certify the aircraft, it is not possible to operate these aircraft on runway width below 45m without additional considerations

Basically any airline operating a "W" pattern through Southampton would need to ensure that the plane and the crew are certified as above. This means either all of the planes and crew need training/ certifying or only the few that operate to Southampton and risk disruption if there is a crew or plane change due to operational reasons.

Also, Boeing article showing decreased cross wind limits and need to increase VMCG leading to higher V1 and therefor more risk of a high speed abandon and more time for engine to fail on take off.
http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/Narrow_Runway_Operations.pdf

not being negative , just bringing facts from many years flying both airbus and Boeing

[JSCL]

Basically any airline operating a "W" pattern through Southampton would need to ensure that the plane and the crew are certified as above. This means either all of the planes and crew need training/ certifying or only the few that operate to Southampton and risk disruption if there is a crew or plane change due to operational reasons.

Also, Boeing article showing decreased cross wind limits and need to increase VMCG leading to higher V1 and therefor more risk of a high speed abandon and more time for engine to fail on take off.
http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/Narrow_Runway_Operations.pdf

not being negative , just bringing facts from many years flying both airbus and Boeing
You mean to debunk the wikipedia specification readers? How dare you.

[Gurnard]

Meanwhile, life goes on.

The aviation industry is in the midst of its biggest ever existential crisis. As things stand today, IATA are expecting recovery to 2019 levels around 2025, others have different views. Paris Airports for instance expect recovery by 2027. The generally accepted rate of recovery around the industry is building this year from -50 to 60% below 2019 traffic, rising to -30% in 2021, -10-15% in 2022 and so on. Of course no one knows for sure.

Many airlines and airports have had little or no income for six months, they are bleeding cash at unsustainable levels, there is a very real prospect that more will go bust and disappear this winter, meanwhile, those with a good balance sheet will expand into the gaps arising. Just as at SOU routes vacated by Flybe are being picked up by others - but for the foreseeable future at a much reduced capacity. LGW for instance is likely to see more Ryanair and Wizz, taking advantage of the doubts about return of Virgin, Norwegian and others.

The financial press is reporting that distressed airlines and airports are selling assets to raise cash, such as sale and lease back of aircraft, buildings, aircraft engines and land. Terminals are being closed and mothballed around the world.

For most regional airports in the UK and elsewhere, survival is the objective for at least the next two years, then recovery. Investment on the other hand is a long way off. The only thing that airports can currently control is cost, they have no significant ability to drive revenue for which many are certainly desperate.

In the meantime, airports are running on skeleton staffing levels, thousands of airport staff have already been made redundant in the UK alone. Not to mention the airline redundancies and those in air traffic control. Domestic and leisure travel is expected to lead the recovery when it comes.... so, if you want to support your local airport, there is only one strategy that might work; USE IT... or perhaps more than ever before, you will lose it!

FF
Well said FF; a sensible and reasoned post. This forum is for rumours and news, rather than for opinions - some of which are grossly deluded or plain childish fantasy. Angry ranting gets nowhere and should be taken elsewhere. Constructive analysis, as in the above post, gets to the core of the matter and assists in intelligent debate.

[TCAS FAN]

With all this discussion on SOU runway width, apologies for going back to the comparison with SEN but they have a 36 metre width rather than SOU's 37 metres, and also a LDA 1604 metres, less than SOU's. Doesn't appear to bother RYR & EZY.

[SKOJB]

With all this discussion on SOU runway width, apologies for going back to the comparison with SEN but they have a 36 metre width rather than SOU's 37 metres, and also a LDA 1604 metres, less than SOU's. Doesn't appear to bother RYR & EZY.

Agreed but for the majority of posters, they dare suggest anything positive and are only looking for every scenario why x, y and z won’t happen. It’s true the airport has it’s limitations which have been relentlessly pointed out recently but my word does it have some very positive benefits also. Bottom line is that if the extension is completed, there is nothing to suggest that the likes of EZY or any other airline won’t take a look at offering a limited selection of services, based aircraft or not, to the Med region as before and they will not be distracted by a north south runway nor it being only 37m in width as long as the finances make sense. Let’s wait and see!

[Dropoffcharge]

also a LDA 1604 metres, less than SOU's. Doesn't appear to bother RYR & EZY.
Is that all down to the grooved runway surface at SEN? I dont know the exact stats on gains etc, or if its only applicable in wet conditions? That's maybe something SOU could also look at if the advantages are proven.

[SWBKCB]

EZY/RYR flights out of SEN is (was) mainly operated by based crews. bad bear was pointing out the difficulties in having an operation at SOU based mainly on 'W' flights flown by non-based crews.

Basically any airline operating a "W" pattern through Southampton would need to ensure that the plane and the crew are certified as above. This means either all of the planes and crew need training/ certifying or only the few that operate to Southampton and risk disruption if there is a crew or plane change due to operational reasons.

[TCAS FAN]

Is that all down to the grooved runway surface at SEN? I dont know the exact stats on gains etc, or if its only applicable in wet conditions? That's maybe something SOU could also look at if the advantages are proven.

The issue of a grooved runway is mentioned many posts ago. SOU has a grooved asphalt runway, but it does not apparently work as it should do due to the runway having a crossfall for drainage rather than being cambered.

Most of the problem was/is due to those doing the runway inspections not adhering to the standard whereby a matt appearance of the runway surface = Damp, and a shiny appearance = Wet. Been many years since I last came up against this frustration, maybe the many changes in Ops management have now resullted in this issue being finally resolved.

[RW20]

The issue of a grooved runway is mentioned many posts ago. SOU has a grooved asphalt runway, but it does not apparently work as it should do due to the runway having a crossfall for drainage rather than being cambered.

Most of the problem was/is due to those doing the runway inspections not adhering to the standard whereby a matt appearance of the runway surface = Damp, and a shiny appearance = Wet. Been many years since I last came up against this frustration, maybe the many changes in Ops management have now resullted in this issue being finally resolved.
TCAS CAN
It appears that the heavy recent rain has highlighted the old chestnut of wet runway at SOU. ATIS recently reporting wet/wet/wet on many days,perhaps you could clarify
" has anything changed" in runway drainage,if not I presume E145 operations must be compromised in Winter operations at SOU.
On a separate note a light aircraft requested diversion for Lee recently ,but with a £250 landing fee plus extortionate parking fees it inevitably landed at Hurn,where such charges are more acceptable.How can SOU expect to survive if it doesn't open up to GA with reasonable pricing?

[HershamBoys]

Because 'reasonable pricing' probably doesn't cover the cost of ensuring that on arrival and subsequent departure the GA aircraft and its occupants are segregated from the critical part of the security restricted area. At airports with restricted space which handle commercial traffic required to be protected in accordance with a National Aviation Security Programme, it takes either considerable staffing dedicated to managing GA crew and passengers, or a significant investment in security technology, with appropriate personnel ready to respond in the event of the GA occupants straying, to ensure that the Critical Part is not infringed. Infringements of the CP by unscreened people are significant security events, and can seriously disrupt airport operations. It is much simpler for airports to devolve GA handling to agents who can provide demarcated areas (1). That transfers the onus onto the agent to satisfy the airport's security requirements, and permits the airport to say to its own security inspectors, in the event of a breach, "it was the agent that let us down, and we're taking appropriate steps to resolve the issue with them", and frees the airport of the cost of providing an area segregated for GA and staffing its security.

Eventually, it all becomes too much, and only top end GA can absorb the cost of segregation. Its all about the economics of operating an airport, really

HB

(1) 'demarcated area' means an area that is separated by means of access control either from security restricted areas, or, if the demarcated area itself is a security restricted area, from other security restricted areas of an airport;

[stewyb]

Latest changes to EZY schedule, reduced to one weekly in Jan (Sat) and two weekly in Mar (Sat & Sun). BOH also one weekly during Jan!

[rog747]

Latest changes to EZY schedule, reduced to one weekly in Jan (Sat) and two weekly in Mar (Sat & Sun). BOH also one weekly during Jan!

Shame, not a surprise though as sadly not many folk will book an advance Ski Hol right now with both France and Switzerland on the no go travel list + quarantine...

[SeanM1997]

Loganair S21 frequencies from Southampton:

Edinburgh - Southampton - 25x weekly flights (4x M-Fr, 2x Sa, 3x Su)
Glasgow - Southampton - 25x weekly flights (4x M-Fr, 2x Sa, 3x Su)
Newcastle - Southampton - 18x weekly flights (3x M-Fr, 1x Sa, 2x Su) - 1x M-Th extends to/from Aberdeen

[adfly]

The following is currently on sale for next summer:

Blue Islands (1x AT7 based)

Dublin - 7x weekly
Guernsey - 29 weekly (same as originally planned for S20)
Jersey - 23 weekly (as above)
Manchester - 19 weekly

Eastern Airways (4x AT7 based)

Aberdeen - 5 weekly J41 (via Teesside)
Belfast City - 11 weekly AT7 (1 weekly J41 on a Sunday showing in booking engine at the moment, will take the assumption that the winter schedule will carry over as with the other routes and it is a glitch...)
Dublin - 12 weekly AT7 (only route with a Sat flight)
Leeds Bradford - 10 weekly J41
Manchester - 16 weekly AT7
Newcastle - 11 weekly AT7
Teesside - 6 weekly J41

Loganair

Aberdeen - 4 weekly ER3 (via Newcastle)
Edinburgh - 25 weekly ER4
Glasgow - 25 weekly ER4
Newcastle - 18 weekly ER3

TUI

Palma - 2 weekly (Volotea)

Not a bad start with Aurigny and KLM still to release flights (it is rather early of course...). Be nice to see some of the French routes picked up again - would think they'd be a no brainer over the peak summer especially with a very lightly utilised aircraft (Eastern...).

SeanM1997 we seem to have posted almost in sync again!

[The96er]

The following is currently on sale for next summer:

Blue Islands (1x AT7 based)

Dublin - 7x weekly
Guernsey - 29 weekly (same as originally planned for S20)
Jersey - 23 weekly (as above)
Manchester - 19 weekly

Eastern Airways (4x AT7 based)

Aberdeen - 5 weekly J41 (via Teesside)
Belfast City - 11 weekly AT7 (1 weekly J41 on a Sunday showing in booking engine at the moment, will take the assumption that the winter schedule will carry over as with the other routes and it is a glitch...)
Dublin - 12 weekly AT7 (only route with a Sat flight)
Leeds Bradford - 10 weekly J41
Manchester - 16 weekly AT7
Newcastle - 11 weekly AT7
Teesside - 6 weekly J41

Without sounding too pessimistic, I can't see both Eastern and Blue Islands continuing to serve MAN and DUB come summer time in compitition with each other. I suspect one will blink first long before the summer schedule.

[adfly]

Without sounding too pessimistic, I can't see both Eastern and Blue Islands continuing to serve MAN and DUB come summer time in compitition with each other. I suspect one will blink first long before the summer schedule.
I'd be inclined to agree. Hopefully one airline will graciously fall on their sword if they both can't make them work. We know what damage needless fare wars with other regional airlines did for Flybe after all (far from their only financial issue, but definitely one of them)...

[Mr A Tis]

35 flights a week SOU-MAN - I don't think so somehow.

[BACsuperVC10]

Without sounding too pessimistic, I can't see both Eastern and Blue Islands continuing to serve MAN and DUB come summer time in compitition with each other. I suspect one will blink first long before the summer schedule.

Tend to agree, I can't see two airlines on regional UK / Ireland routes working, especially now.

[SKOJB]

Several SOU KLM cancellations in the coming days, guess a sign of the times unfortunately!

[The Nutts Mutts]

It looks like KLM will be running 4 weekly for the rest of September, with the Tuesday, Wednesday and Saturday flights dropped most weeks. Sign of the times as you say. I don't see it changing until the Netherlands is taken off the quarantine list.

[The Nutts Mutts]

Guernsey is going double daily from the 21st September as planned, but the start date for flights to Alderney has been pushed back to the 5th October.

[The Nutts Mutts]

The World Duty Free store in the terminal is opening again from Monday. Another step on the slow road to recovery.

[Wycombe]

Another step on the slow road to recovery

SOU appears to be doing better (in terms of numbers of flights being operated) than a lot of other regional airports.

Anyone any idea how many people they are actually carrying though?

[The Nutts Mutts]

SOU appears to be doing better (in terms of numbers of flights being operated) than a lot of other regional airports.

Anyone any idea how many people they are actually carrying though?

Over 800 passengers yesterday on 24 flights so an average of about 34 per flight. Just an average though to give you an idea, some loads will be much better than others.

[shamrock7seal]

SOU handled 7,594 pax in July 2020

[Wycombe]

Over 800 passengers yesterday on 24 flights so an average of about 34 per flight

Thanks, interesting, bearing in mind that quite a few of those flights would've been J41's and EMB135/145's that doesn't seem too bad.

Saying that, I see LOG sent one of their (ex Flybe-Nordic) AT72's yesterday.

[HKGBOY]

My MAN-SOU J41 trip the other day turned out to be an ATR via BHD. With no cabin service, meaning arriving SOU 3 hours late with nothing to eat/drink on board & everything at Southampton airport is closed. For me my day ended 6 hours with nothing to drink. Be warned if using Eastern or Southampton Airport bring your own stuff.
Pretty poor for an airport, the website does not reflect that virtually all facilities are closed.

[RW20]

My MAN-SOU J41 trip the other day turned out to be an ATR via BHD. With no cabin service, meaning arriving SOU 3 hours late with nothing to eat/drink on board & everything at Southampton airport is closed. For me my day ended 6 hours with nothing to drink. Be warned if using Eastern or Southampton Airport bring your own stuff.
Pretty poor for an airport, the website does not reflect that virtually all facilities are closed.
Sounds about right for an airport that like others is struggling to survive,I can't see Eastern surviving long term,and where will that the leave Southampton?
Pull your finger out Southampton or very soon you will be no more!

[EXEL1966]

My MAN-SOU J41 trip the other day turned out to be an ATR via BHD. With no cabin service, meaning arriving SOU 3 hours late with nothing to eat/drink on board & everything at Southampton airport is closed. For me my day ended 6 hours with nothing to drink. Be warned if using Eastern or Southampton Airport bring your own stuff.
Pretty poor for an airport, the website does not reflect that virtually all facilities are closed.

Suggest you put a claim in under EU261 if it was over 3 hours late.

Did you not ask for water ?

[Wycombe]

Seems that SOU-AMS with KLM will not now be going double-daily from the start of the winter timetable. Not a great surprise.

DUB still not started but appears it does with EZE on 23rd Oct.

[SKOJB]

Seems that SOU-AMS with KLM will not now be going double-daily from the start of the winter timetable. Not a great surprise.

DUB still not started but appears it does with EZE on 23rd Oct.

KLM goes double daily using the E90 from the new year, although I expect that to change, as do I the Dublin service. All very fluid at present!

[Buster the Bear]

More potentially grim reading. Read the entire article.

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/95588-uks-eastern-airways-insists-its-future-is-secure

[SWBKCB]

Substitute "Eastern" with the name of any other airline

[SKOJB]

Grim reading for all currently, of which Eastern are only one of them. This article could be copy and pasted and used for any airline!

[rog747]

From SOU Airport Facebook page -
- We're asking to extend the runway by just 164m & add some car parking
- We're not expanding the airport
- The extension remains fully within our current boundaries

From their photo posted here one can fully and clearly see what SOU airport's constraints are about any future expansion and the type of planes that can get in and out with an economical payload - It is very limiting.

You can see the touchdown zones TDZ and the 'rubber' at each end, and see just how short the airport is and what (obstacles) are at each end of the runway.

The 164m starter strip (shown in blue) could enable an A320 to take maybe a full load (186 pax) to say Faro, Malaga, or possibly Corfu...(when and if, we get the package holidaymaker back again en masse)
Doubt it will be able to do the Canaries non stop with 186 pax - it would likely be payload restricted.
It has already been established that Ryanair will not come to SOU with it's 737's, even with their shorter routes that they fly in the main. That type is simply not suitable for SOU.

Someone on FB suggested to build the runway over the M27....
OK so to tunnel the m27 under would take about a £1bn or more and years to do,
Impossible...

I'm not bashing SOU - merely highlighting there is not much they can do with the current hardware...

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1219x680/120175239_3491570507570847_8398026097025092784_o_fb5396fb400 a8f3c748f094fcf8dc2e9c2ea251b.jpg

[RW20]

We have known about all the limitations of SOU for some time,with Civic 19 likely to be around for the foreseeable future,I feel the runway extension is becoming increasing irrelevant,the real question is can the airport survive with its current destinations and limited passenger numbers?

[Red Four]

Does this upgrade plan confer the standard 240m length Runway End Safety Areas at each end? If not, what will the length of the RESAs be?

[Irish Cream]

You never know what might be around the corner. These things all happen for a reason. Tbh Eastern was a concern even before COVID. And it’s absolutely no surprise they have stopped Newcastle to Southampton as there were far too many flights on that route with two airlines - completely unsustainable.

Post Covid-19 I’dlove to see BA CityFlyer come in to SOU with a based and quality operation with jets rather than the very old and costly to maintain J-41’s of Eastern.

[rog747]

We have known about all the limitations of SOU for some time, with Covid 19 likely to be around for the foreseeable future, I feel the runway extension is becoming increasing irrelevant, the real question is can the airport survive with its current destinations and limited passenger numbers?

Indeed - SOU today hinted in another FB post that if the 164m extension does not go ahead the airport may close and they will see the business all go to LHR----on the roads

They also mentioned how important the Cruise industry is (well sadly not right now) and HM Royal Navy personnel at Portsmouth who used the airport before Covid and the loss of Flybe.

[SWBKCB]

And it’s absolutely no surprise they have stopped Newcastle to Southampton as there were far too many flights on that route with two airlines - completely unsustainable.

A J.41 operated T37814 this afternoon SOU-NCL?

[The Nutts Mutts]

A J.41 operated T37814 this afternoon SOU-NCL?

You're right, but I've just checked and it looks like today's flight might have been the last one, as there's no availability from tomorrow onwards.

In terms of passenger numbers Eastern have been absolutely spanked by Loganair on this route. Their average number of passengers per flight was climbing steadily over the summer, but it's dropped off a cliff recently. I like Eastern and hope to see them survive and grow at SOU but the hard truth is that in every way I can see I believe they offer an inferior product to Loganair and aren't as well known amongst the general public. They were up against it from the start, as there's no competition between two daily jet flights morning and evening, or an early afternoon Jetstream, especially in the current climate.

[Musket90]

Does this upgrade plan confer the standard 240m length Runway End Safety Areas at each end? If not, what will the length of the RESAs be?

The minimum length requirement for a RESA is 90m. If the 240m recommended length is not achieved then according to CAP168 and EASA regs a safety assessment needs to be submitted to CAA.

[Albert Hall]

So they've just stopped Newcastle at basically a day's notice? Woke up this morning, flew the last flight today and decided that enough was enough? That must be one of the fastest exits in history if so. Either there must be quite a few p***ed off passengers or they had next to no forward bookings - I'm not sure which is the lesser of the evils.

If something is losing money then no-one can't afford to sit with it nowadays. But abrupt route cuts like that don't build customer confidence in what's supposed to be your new home market. Wow.

[SKOJB]

Let’s be honest the usual suspects on here are always bashing the airport. Things may not be ideal but in this current world nothing much is and let’s face it, the airport is doing darn sight better in any recovery when compared to the likes of SEN etc. It’s suggested that the A320 with the extension will be limited to PMI, ALC and the like, I say perfect and suspect this is exactly what the airport are hoping for along with a few French regionals and European cities which will give the airport a secure future. Of course this depends like every other airport on a post Covid recovery, of which I have no doubt will come about but in the meantime the ride will be slightly bumpy. SOU are however pushing ahead quite rightly with the planning application in order to maximise all future opportunities and revenues and I am very confident that they shall succeed in the near future!

[Atlantic Explorer]

So they've just stopped Newcastle at basically a day's notice? Woke up this morning, flew the last flight today and decided that enough was enough? That must be one of the fastest exits in history if so. Either there must be quite a few p***ed off passengers or they had next to no forward bookings - I'm not sure which is the lesser of the evils.

If something is losing money then no-one can't afford to sit with it nowadays. But abrupt route cuts like that don't build customer confidence in what's supposed to be your new home market. Wow.

Indeed, although Eastern’s previous history with SOU isn’t exactly rosy is it.

[PintofDoom]

Indeed, although Eastern’s previous history with SOU isn’t exactly rosy is it.

This is Easterns management style to a tee. And they wondered why so little pilots and CC opted for transfers to the SOU base as this is Easterns 6th attempt from memory.

As a side note more CC have been made redundant at the LBA and NCL bases unless they are rated on the E170.

[SWBKCB]

So they've just stopped Newcastle at basically a day's notice? Woke up this morning, flew the last flight today and decided that enough was enough? That must be one of the fastest exits in history if so. Either there must be quite a few p***ed off passengers or they had next to no forward bookings - I'm not sure which is the lesser of the evils.

Hadn't the EZE SOU-NCL schedule just gone to 2 a day on Monday?

[Wycombe]

Hadn't the EZE SOU-NCL schedule just gone to 2 a day on Monday?

It was supposed to I think, but don't think it actually did. LOG is 2x daily now though, during the week.

[Red Four]

The minimum length requirement for a RESA is 90m. If the 240m recommended length is not achieved then according to CAP168 and EASA regs a safety assessment needs to be submitted to CAA.
Thanks yes I realised that. Do you know what the new RESA lengths will be under this extension plan?

[Buster the Bear]

The amount of debt all airlines are taking on from governments or via deferred repayments on leased aircraft which must be paid back with interest, the days of cheap airfares have mostly gone. The airlines that emerge past Covid-19 will be mostly free from the aforementioned. Should Southampton not expand to take the A320/737Max, the real estate is worth more than the long term profit for the landlord. Can Southampton carve out a niche? Ask me that in 6 months time. I certainly hope that it does, but relying on businesses to pay more and more to send staff, when Zoom/Teams can replace a lot of air journeys will certainly be challenged. Airports will simply have to hike charges. Not good news for consumers.

[davidjohnson6]

The value of the land occupied by SOU is, I agree, likely more valuable than SOU's future profits. However, the change of use of the land would mean a decrease in the value of land all over Southampton and south Hampshire and damage to the associated economy. This decrease in value would perhaps be larger than what AGS are missing out on from a major land sale
It is in the interest of local Govt to refuse permission for a change of use while the airport seems to be self-sustaining or at least able to survive on its reserves

[BAladdy]

Blue Island have postponed the launch of flights to DUB and MAN. Flights are now planned to start 29th March.

Eastern Airways are suspending flights to Leeds Bradford from 2nd October to 4th January. There planned W20 schedule:

Aberdeen
5 x Weekly via MME. Operates Weekdays/
Belfast City
10 x Weekly. Operates 2 x Daily ATR72 Monday to Friday & Daily J41 on Sunday
Dublin
12 x Weekly ATR72. Operates 2 x Daily Mon-Fri & Daily Sat/Sun
Leeds Bradford
Resumes 4th January - 10 x Weekly J41. Operates 2 x Daily Mon-Thu & Daily Fri/Sun
Manchester
Until 31st December - 6 x Weekly ATR72. Operates Daily Sun-Fri.
From 3rd January - 16 x Weekly ATR72. Operates 3 x Daily Mon-Fri & Daily Sun
Teeside
6 x Weekly J41. Operates Daily Sunday to Friday. Flights on Sundays operate via BHD.

[RW20]

As Coronivirus takes hold this Winter the airport will struggle to survive,BOU has other back up on site industries to support it . Even with reduced airside activities it will come through the crisis and be an airport still.It's debatable if Southampton will be still functioning this time on 12 months time if the Coronivrus continues unabated.

[SWBKCB]

Is there a special algorithim on Pprune which takes the second 'S' out of Teesside?

And BOU is presumably Bournemouth? Is there an assumption here that the back up industries will not be as impacted as the airlines? Given the current situation, speculating who might crash first is a bit unedifying (but not unexpected)

[Fly757X]

Maybe I'm a little detached but I'm not really getting the whole "struggle to survive" carry on. Sure it will be a quiet airfield but SOU isn't an isolated issue and as far as I'm concerned SOU has done really well when it comes to emerging in a post-BEE world when compared to other airfields, probably only behind BHD. There is plenty of airports around the UK which even in normal times would kill for a schedule such as the one presented.

I'll admit, I'm not particularly clued in on the operation of airports in this region of the UK. However with the already announced schedules for S21 surely one can only be optimistic for the future? There is plenty other airports (much smaller at that) out there in a much more precarious position when it comes W20/21. My sympathies are with folk at the airport as I'm sure it must be a worrying time. However if we can all get over W20/21 with the correct and rightful support from the government, I can only envisage a time in the future, whether that be 6 or 12 months ahead when our regionals are in a more balanced place than even before the pandemic when it comes to domestic connectivity.

[rog747]

Maybe I'm a little detached but I'm not really getting the whole "struggle to survive" carry on. Sure it will be a quiet airfield but SOU isn't an isolated issue and as far as I'm concerned SOU has done really well when it comes to emerging in a post-BEE world when compared to other airfields, probably only behind BHD. There is plenty of airports around the UK which even in normal times would kill for a schedule such as the one presented.

I'll admit, I'm not particularly clued in on the operation of airports in this region of the UK. However with the already announced schedules for S21 surely one can only be optimistic for the future? There is plenty other airports (much smaller at that) out there in a much more precarious position when it comes W20/21. My sympathies are with folk at the airport as I'm sure it must be a worrying time. However if we can all get over W20/21 with the correct and rightful support from the government, I can only envisage a time in the future, whether that be 6 or 12 months ahead when our regionals are in a more balanced place than even before the pandemic when it comes to domestic connectivity.

Today from the SOU Ops Director speaking on their FB pages -

''We are fighting for survival, we are a failing business, since the loss of Flybe, and now Covid.
We have a real threat that the airport may have to close''......

This is really sad - and frankly what else can they do?

Here is a link to his statements and the FB post https://www.southamptonairport.com/runway?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Runway+Expansion%2CSOU+Social&utm_term=&utm_content=

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=786920115184602

I fully support using SOU where I can, both now and in the past, but sadly since Covid any attempt to try and fly using the airport and booking the likes of Eastern have been untenable for me unfortunately.
I do hope they get through this but it is not looking good.

Just seen this posted on the EXT thread -
Meanwhile in reality, a funding package worth nearly £1m designed to ensure Exeter Airport can avoid the worst case scenario of closure has been unanimously backed at East Devon District Council cabinet meeting Wednesday night.

[LTNman]

Just threats to influence the planners regarding a longer runway. In fact they could spend the money on the runway and not get the aircraft that would actually need the extra length so making a bad situation worse.

[SKOJB]

Just threats to influence the planners regarding a longer runway. In fact they could spend the money on the runway and not get the aircraft that would actually need the extra length so making a bad situation worse.

Those marketing agencies are damn good!;)

[Rivet Joint]

Maybe I'm a little detached but I'm not really getting the whole "struggle to survive" carry on. Sure it will be a quiet airfield but SOU isn't an isolated issue and as far as I'm concerned SOU has done really well when it comes to emerging in a post-BEE world when compared to other airfields, probably only behind BHD. There is plenty of airports around the UK which even in normal times would kill for a schedule such as the one presented.

I'll admit, I'm not particularly clued in on the operation of airports in this region of the UK. However with the already announced schedules for S21 surely one can only be optimistic for the future? There is plenty other airports (much smaller at that) out there in a much more precarious position when it comes W20/21. My sympathies are with folk at the airport as I'm sure it must be a worrying time. However if we can all get over W20/21 with the correct and rightful support from the government, I can only envisage a time in the future, whether that be 6 or 12 months ahead when our regionals are in a more balanced place than even before the pandemic when it comes to domestic connectivity.

Nice to see a a balanced and intelligent post on here for a change. To give you a heads up this thread has long since been infected by a couple of resident trolls who seem to revel in the fact that hundreds of families livelihoods are hanging in the balance at the moment and even worse wishing their demise is around the corner. There are definitely grounds for one individual to be banned by the mods but unfortunately no action so far (does anyone else think it's ironic that he has named himself after a runway at the airport that he spews nothing but hate about?). At the very least this thread should come with a disclaimer pinned to the top warning well meaning people not to fall into the trolls traps.

Its very simple, the music has stopped and everything is currently on hold, not just in this country, but around the world. Just as it did after 9/11 and the various other financial crashes that have happened since then. All the money that was sloshing around before covid hasn't disappeared, its just being held onto until covid is under control. It is honestly a waste of breath discussing any individual airport's current status as they are all in the same boat. Routes are constantly going to be chopping and changing to work around what are very fluid travel restrictions. Lets keep ignoring the trolls and start being a bit more positive, things can only get better and SOU going forward with the investment should be grounds for much positive discussion.

As for the quotes coming out of the management, there is also a quote confirming that £15m is set aside and ready to be spent on the extension. I think its safe to say that SOU is financially secure. Even if the current operator decided to call it quits someone else would come along to keep it running as an airport. The various local authorities would also resist all attempts for it to be used as anything else. Look at the hardly needed and long dormant Manston airport's recent goings on for a start.

[rog747]

I honestly think the crisis with our UK aviation, not just here at SOU, (and now it seems also at EXT) is cataclysmic, and many folk, even on here simply do not realise the dire scale and graveness of state of the Industry and perhaps some have maybe had a couple of Merlots, so see it all rather rose-tinted.

Who would have thought what has happened to BA & VS shedding 1000's of staff and scores of airframes grounded and may never fly again , and now we have Easy Jet of all of the 'giants' hanging on by a thread for its own survival. It's awful.
I have half a dozen BA friends all with over 30-40 years service all now on the heap.
One is now working on the Toll Booth at the Sandbanks Ferry - what a change from flying 747's for 41 years but he loves it.


Oh when it all goes back to 'normal in 6 or 12 months time...
Really? will it? - Sorry,
I cannot foresee a time when we go back to flying normally before the cash runs out for some - be it the airline, the businesses, or the airport...Then what.

Don't shoot messengers, I think SOU has been brave enough to announce today a major wake up call that our Industry and local infrastructure is heading just one way unless we get out of this Covid nightmare somehow.
I am pro SOU/BOH & EXT all local to me, but this is a very weird time & totally unprecedented in our times.

[LTNman]

It is harder to kill off an airport like SOU than an airline as the physical asset will remain for a new owner who will come in without the debts of the previous owner. Yes airlines have and will fail but the same people will form new airlines out of the ashes of the failed airlines. Looking forward 2 or 3 years might seem like a long time but in a few years time looking back to these dark days won’t seem as bad.

[rog747]

It is harder to kill off an airport than an airline as the physical asset will remain for a new owner who will come in without the debts of the previous owner. Yes airlines have and will fail but the same people will form new airlines out of the ashes of the failed airlines. Looking forward 2 or 3 years might seem like a long time but in a few years time looking back to these dark days won’t seem so bad.

I truly hope so old chap, I really do...

Just seen this - Turkey has just now been added to the No-Go on your Hols list...
Guess TUI's BOH to DLM & AYT will get canned for OCT>? (Last peak departure was Oct half term)
That would leave just one TUI holiday flight a week from BOH to CFU, with no currently winter season at all... That's not gonna butter many crumpets is it.

[kcockayne]

I am in sympathy with your general sentiments, Rivetjoint: but it is hard to be optimistic & difficult to agree with "things can only get better" in the short or medium term. I said on here back in February that this crisis was existential for the airlines & the economy - nothing has changed, yet. In fact, things have got worse since then, & look like they are going to get worse. I do , however, very much hope that you are proved correct.

[TCAS FAN]

Thanks yes I realised that. Do you know what the new RESA lengths will be under this extension plan?The subject of how long RESAs will be with an extended runway is somewhat akin to how long is a piece of string?

As mentioned the minimum length of a RESA should be 90 metres, they should also have a width of twice the runway width. Currently 02/20 meets this minimum requirement with TORA 1723 (02) and 1650 (20). The current UK AIP entries for SOU specify a 90 metre RESA for both runways.

One further point to remember is that a RESA is an additional requirement to a runway strip, which surrounds the runway with the intent that it should be obstacle free, albeit frangible signs/other equipment may be present if there for air navigational purposes.

Consequently the absolute minimum undershoot/overshoot protected area needs to be 150 metres (strip end + RESA).

The conundrum is by extending the runway by 164 metres can/has the airport owner convinced the CAA that an acceptable safety margin exists with current RESAs? If not then what could be gained by extending the runway paved surface is going to be eroded by a need to provide a longer RESA.

The most potential gain with the extension is runway 20. If the CAA will agree to the current south end RESA the potential TORA will be 1799 metres (current 1650 metre TORA plus 149 metres). Why only 149 metre increase? As the runway is classified as Code 3 (due to its width) the maximum TORA for a Code 3 is 1799 metres. The remaining 15 metres can be added to the current RESA.

Runway 02 could possibly have the TORA increased. Looking at Google Earth the proposed extension will require re-alignment of the current boundary fence in order to accommodate it. Assuming that there is only 164 metres to play with, subtracting the minimum 150 metres (strip end + 90 metres) that gives a potential TORA 1737 metres. If any of the land outside of the current boundary fence, as it appears that it is, anything that can be reclaimed by levelling it will be a bonus and possibly permit further extension of the 02 TORA towards the maximum 1799 metres.

As with many things at SOU, nothing is simple. Any extension of the 02 TORA will take the end of it closer to the large rail sheds, possibly negating any extra gained due to increasing obstacles in the take-off climb surface.

I sincerely hope that AGS has done all their homework, including speaking to prospective operators or aircraft manufacturers, and has already secured agreement from CAA as to the RESA lengths and thereby the TORA increases that will be possible.

[Red Four]

Thanks for the reply TCAS.

In view of the limited space to increase RESA's to the recommended 240m/2x width for a code 3 runway, I wonder if in gaining the necessary CAA approval for the runway extension project, that the airport might be aiming to use EMAS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineered_materials_arrestor_system) as a major plank of their argument to the CAA. I am not aware that the CAA has yet approved an EMAS installation in the UK, although I could be wrong?
Either way, I would expect the airport would have to show an overall improvement in safety by having this extension, not just wanting the situation of longer notified and usable lengths to market to prospective airlines.

[SWBKCB]

Runway 02 could possibly have the TORA increased. Looking at Google Earth the proposed extension will require re-alignment of the current boundary fence in order to accommodate it. Assuming that there is only 164 metres to play with, subtracting the minimum 150 metres (strip end + 90 metres) that gives a potential TORA 1737 metres. I any of the land outside of the current boundary fence, as it appears that it is, anything that can be reclaimed by levelling it will be a bonus and possibly permit further extension of the 02 TORA towards the maximum 1799 metres.

From the airport website:
Our plans will not lead to an expansion of the airport site. Southampton’s longer runway and expanded parking facilities will be fully contained within the current airport boundary.

Is there an inconsistency here, are does the current boundary fence not represent the actual airport boundary?

[TCAS FAN]

From the airport website:


Is there an inconsistency here, are does the current boundary fence not represent the actual airport boundary?

We are in to interpretations. Which boundary are they talking about?

The boundary of the current EASA Certificated Aerodrome is most probably the boundary fence. This is part of the overall Southampton International Airport site, ie excluding such things as car parks, hangars and the northeast corner grass area.

If you look at Google Earth you will see an access track leading to the northeast corner, presumably on land owned by AGS. If AGS owned land extends out to the edge of the rail yard re-alignment of the track appears to be an option and therein moving the boundary fence would be possible. This would add approximately 55+ metres to the equation. Longer 02 TORA versus RESA?

[TCAS FAN]

Thanks for the reply TCAS.

In view of the limited space to increase RESA's to the recommended 240m/2x width for a code 3 runway, I wonder if in gaining the necessary CAA approval for the runway extension project, that the airport might be aiming to use EMAS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineered_materials_arrestor_system) as a major plank of their argument to the CAA. I am not aware that the CAA has yet approved an EMAS installation in the UK, although I could be wrong?
Either way, I would expect the airport would have to show an overall improvement in safety by having this extension, not just wanting the situation of longer notified and usable lengths to market to prospective airlines.

A predecessor of EMAS was installed off the south end of runway 20 by a previous airport operator. This followed an overrun by a C550 which resulted in it ending up on the adjacent M27 Motorway. The overrun apparently caused by pilot error, landing with a tailwind on a wet runway.

From memory it was only used in anger once, again by a pilot induced accident involving a PA 34, landing late in well below RVR minima during fog. Good news was that the arrestor bed worked, however the PA 34's undercarriage suffered significant damage.

The UK CAA at the time were very enthusiastic about an arrestor bed, advocating that it could indeed mitigate risks for a less than recommended length of RESA. This subsequently changed when they realised that the material used in the arrestor bed was absorbent and could accordingly greatly increase the fire hazard by subsequently fuelling a fire following a fuel spill.

I have to admit that I am not familiar with EMAS, but if it can eradicate the possibility of increased fire risk, SOU may wish to discuss it further with CAA. It could only be considered for runway 20 as most, if not all, of the 02 RESA will be paved runway surface.

[HershamBoys]

One of the fundamental problems with EMAS is, I am informed, that once it has been used in anger, it has to be replaced in its entirity. So, if an aircraft overruns and enters the EMAS area, after it has been removed, declared distances have to be recalculated and operations restricted until the EMAS is re-laid. This also places an obligation on the airport operator to hold spare EMAS systems in stock in order to facilitate a rapid resumption of normal operations. This comes at a cost, which some operators may not wish to bear - no finance departments enjoy shelling out for something that is hopefully not going to be used.

HB

[Musket90]

TCAS - Southampton's runway is Code 4C according to their EASA Certificate which can be viewed on the CAA web site. UK CAA use greater value of TODA/ASDA to determine runway coding. SOU's TODA for 02 is 1831m and for 20 1805m which being above 1799m puts it into Code 4.

[TCAS FAN]

TCAS - Southampton's runway is Code 4C according to their EASA Certificate which can be viewed on the CAA web site. UK CAA use greater value of TODA/ASDA to determine runway coding. SOU's TODA for 02 is 1831m and for 20 1805m which being above 1799m puts it into Code 4.

I am aware of this. It appears to have been so designated by the declared distances contained in the Certificate, indicating TODAs in excess of 1799 metres. This anomaly has lasted over 40+ years and will disappear when, if the runway is extended, the declared distances are recalculated. The reason for TODAs in excess of 1799 metres I cannot explain, possibly some form of grandfather rights..

For runway 02/20 to be designated Code 4 it needs to have a minimum width of 45 metres (ICAO Annex 14 para 3.1.10 refers). If UK bails out of EASA, CAP 168 will apply, whereby Tables 3.1A and 3.2 will apply which clearly indicate a minimum width 45 metres for a Code 4 runway.

[stewyb]

Good to have some informative threads for a change and will be interesting to see what distances are designated once extension is complete. I say complete as I fully expect the application to be approved shortly!

[Donkey97]

What’s the current situation with Southampton Handling agents? I know Aurigny are still self handling but what’s the latest with Swissport?
The last I heard they were leaving SOU altogether, but didn’t know if this was still the case.
If so, does anyone know who’s handling who now?

[TCAS FAN]

Have managed to find time to have a look at the Planning Application and see that it includes the runway extension and a blast screen.

The subject of airport boundary previously mentioned in posts # 2606 & 2607. appears to have been clarified. The Location Plan contained in the Planning Application indicates the airport site, not just that currently enclosed by the current boundary fence.

The blast screen is outside the current boundary fence and additionally the proposed extension, shown on the “Pavement Layout Plan", is so close that the fence will have to be moved.

Returning to the blast screen, a separate drawing of it indicates a possible clue as to the intended 02 TORA and therein the RESA. Shown on the plan is a “TAKE-OFF CLIMB SURFACE (TOCS) 2% SLOPE”. This is a runway protection surface which should be obstacle free in order to protect a departing aircraft.

The blast screen shown on the drawing extends above the TOCS. If this happens it could affect 02 take-off performance weights, and partially negate what could be achieved will all the extended TORA available.

The origin of the 2% TOCS slope is the runway strip end, or clearway (if provided beyond the strip end). Due to the limited distances I am discounting any clearway. The approximate distance to the origin is 113 metres from the point that the TOCS intersects the blast screen. Adding the runway strip end (60 metres) to this is the end of TORA.

Using Google Earth the expected location of the blast screen (shown on the “Block Plan” along the runway centreline to the current runway end is approximately 224 metres. Subtracting 173 metres from this (113 + 60) the end of TORA is 51 metres beyond the current runway end, giving a new 02 TORA of 1774 metres.

Due to the indicated alignment of the blast fence, to achieve a 2 x runway width RESA the length will be approximately 124 metres, better than the 90 metre minimum, but short of the recommended length.

I stress that all my calculations are approximate with an assumption that the ground level at the start of the 2% slope is the same, or close to, that at the blast screen.

It is hoped that AGS have done all their homework and that TORA and RESA lengths are already a done deal with CAA.

[SKOJB]

TCAS FAN - with it being in use primarily, what will be the TORA for 20?

[TCAS FAN]

TCAS FAN - with it being in use primarily, what will be the TORA for 20?

Please see my post 2604. I do however stress that all my posts are IMHO.

[RW20]

TCAS FAN,
As always a comprehensive analysis of the Runway extension application.
The truth of the matter is has AGS done there home work ,debatable at least!
With the ongoing pandamic does the airport really need the extension ?,again dabateable, can the airport sustain its operations without the extension,yes it if it opens up to more training,and light aviation,coupled to domestic operations,it might work.However has AGS got other plans?

[TheFlyingWalrus]

I wonder if 02 is obstacle limited with the big railway shed to the right? If the runway is extended as the main benefit is for 20, 02 then becomes the limiting runway, in use 40% of the time? Would not be sensible to have a flying programme based on performance you can only use 60% of the time - other wise you end up not refuelling (to get the performance,) taking off and landing at BOH to refuel and then use their longer runway, then flying flat out to try and get back before SOU closes. Very embarrassing - we sometimes had to do this.

Over the years the emergency turn procedure for 20 came and went. Essentially if engine fail turn right 15 deg at end of the runway over the Itchen.
On the 146 this would give us maybe another 200kg. But it was dependent on some trees right on the edge of the Type A chart (I think it was) and whether these were factored in or disregarded by the powers that be.

If it was me I would make sure this was a available, and save the £15m to try and weather the storm.

Back in the day if performance limited and on 02 we would do standing start with the tail right over the arrestor bed, which then blew the litag material across the motorway. Interestingly didn’t happen on the 195. I remember on one such occasion full of pax for Spain, with the performance worked out to the kilo, OAT rising, setting off at the same time the airport Kestral uncharacteristically decided to cross the runway at low level.
I saw this streak to my left at about 80kts. We kept going. I later found out the Kestral had been found on its back in the grass, feet in the air, but stunned. It was taken to some kind of sanctuary where it made a full recovery. Happy times.

I’m very grateful to have had many great years at SOU and I wish the airport all the best. R.

[Irish Cream]

The SOU-DUB route by Eastern has been postponed to 4th Jan 21

[TCAS FAN]

I wonder if 02 is obstacle limited with the big railway shed to the right? .......

Over the years the emergency turn procedure for 20 came and went. Essentially if engine fail turn right 15 deg at end of the runway over the Itchen.
On the 146 this would give us maybe another 200kg. But it was dependent on some trees right on the edge of the Type A chart (I think it was) and whether these were factored in or disregarded by the powers that be.

I’m very grateful to have had many great years at SOU and I wish the airport all the best. R.

The 15 degree right turn procedure is still in place as an alternative Type A Chart for 20 in order to get a better obstacle environment. Problem was that the closest trees were too close to allow for the turn to be executed, therefore resulting in having to use the straight ahead Type A. Hopefully this problem, including the trees you mention, will go away now that extensive tree work has been done and new versions of the 20 Type A's are published.

You mention +200 KG on the 146, a figure of up to 3 tonnes was quoted by BRAL ops as limiting 145 departures off 20 with the offending trees in place, again too close to take advantage of the 15 degree turn.

Cannot comment on whether the large shed north of the runway is performance limiting, maybe there is a perfomance guru out there who could?

I too enjoyed having the 146s resident, once came back from Malaga to SOU on the jump seat, in the days we could. A good bunch of guys to work with, most converting on to the 195s.

[gkmeech]

With a calm wind reading 02 always gave a better take-off distance / weight calculation due to a better Obstacle Clearance Limit.

[TheFlyingWalrus]

So runway extension won’t benefit 02 I think?

[TCAS FAN]

With a calm wind reading 02 always gave a better take-off distance / weight calculation due to a better Obstacle Clearance Limit.

Graham

I think you mean obstacle clearance environment, an OCL was something related to an instrument approach procedure, replaced by OCA/OCH.

[TCAS FAN]

So runway extension won’t benefit 02 I think?

If they build the blast sceen higher than the 02 TOCS (my post # 2614 refers) I would be inclined to agree. If they don't then que sera, sera.

[stewyb]

https://travelweekly.co.uk/articles/388594/easyjet-to-open-summer-bases-in-faro-and-malaga

could be good news for SOU further down the line with the extension and no need for any basing at the airport!

[gkmeech]

So runway extension won’t benefit 02 I think?

Correct, no take-off change to 02, and no landing distance change on 20, displaced threshold

[TCAS FAN]

Correct, no take-off change to 02, and no landing distance change on 20, displaced threshold

The jury is out on 02 TORA, no change on 20 LDA due obstacles in the 20 approach area (still greater than SEN), possible increase in 02 LDA.

[SKOJB]

The jury is out on 02 TORA, no change on 20 LDA due obstacles in the 20 approach area (still greater than SEN), possible increase in 02 LDA.

whatever the new declared distances, enough for Airbus ops!

[TCAS FAN]

whatever the new declared distances, enough for Airbus ops!

Especially if they are Neos, even B738 SFPs. Just need somewhere to park them!

[SKOJB]

Especially if they are Neos, even B738 SFPs. Just need somewhere to park them!

Looking at the plans, the 4 reconfigured stands should be sufficient for the foreseeable (assume no planning required for this?)

[SWBKCB]

A report on the Eastern/Aurigny tie-up linked on the Teesside thread includes this snippet...

The new cooperation will cover Eastern's existing services from Southampton to Belfast City (https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/airports/1841), Manchester, Newcastle, GB (https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/airports/1902), Leeds/Bradford (https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/airports/1886), Aberdeen Dyce (https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/airports/1837), and Dublin Int'l (https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/airports/2201). The airline plans to add more routes to its Southampton network starting in Spring 2021.

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/96126-eastern-airways-aurigny-to-turn-southampton-into-a-hub?fbclid=IwAR0YjrpHpXWHsXkCPGa8vvzIab7HIwn0k1mh5E-QUnfk3xuTkhYnqz07X_A

[RW20]

All this conjecture about runway LDA and TORA for the airport could be irrelevant if there is any truth in this:https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-hampshire-54487771.

[rog747]

All this conjecture about runway LDA and TORA for the airport could be irrelevant if there is any truth in this:https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-hampshire-54487771.

Very sad....
Tis awful to read stuff like this and my post above of Oct 1st where I highlighted the closure warning announcements given that day by both SOU and EXT airports.

BOH is in a slightly stronger position given its busy cargo Ops with half a dozen based A340-600 aircraft there with currently a lot of work,
plus a TUI 738 base (one aircraft all year) for now, but, with no TUI winter 20/21 holiday programme currently to sell, and EASYJET's BOH-GVA Ski service sales in jeopardy due current quarantine rules for both France and Switzerland it's all looking a bit glum there too.
Not sure what RYR at BOH is doing for the winter...

It is all cataclysmic.

[SWBKCB]

All this conjecture about runway LDA and TORA for the airport could be irrelevant if there is any truth in this:https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-hampshire-54487771.

Discussed previously from post #2596 onwards.

Fancy a business seeking planning permission predicting dire consequences if they don't get it - who'd have thought? :rolleyes:

[stewyb]

Council decision expected before Xmas and fully expect it to be approved with conditions!

[Dropoffcharge]

Originally I thought the expansion was to cater for existing aircraft that use the airport to allow them to fly further with greater payloads, now it's being reported its make or break time that if approval isn't granted the A320's and 737's won't be flocking in, so which is it?

[Flitefone]

It is all cataclysmic.[/QUOTE]

This is a global issue which will take years to resolve. The announcements by IATA, ACI (Airports) and various others point to a very difficult future for some time. Those forecasting a recovery (to pre-pandemic levels) are suggesting 5-7 years - everyone's guessing of course - 2025 is tends to be on the optimistic side now, Paris Airports say 2025-27, IATA 2025 (maybe) but could be longer and, it says last week, that airlines will run out on money by the middle of next year even after all the government loans and grants.

Eurocontrol who have issued the best near term forecasts indicate flights through the winter at 50% of normal, most are suggesting there will be 30% fewer flights next summer than in 2019. The UK as a whole is running with passenger levels at about 12.5% of normal which seems to be reflected across most of Europe. Batten down the hatches.

Some airports and airlines will need to hibernate for a while, not all will 'wake up' from the long winter. As Darwin said, it is not the biggest or the strongest that survive changing environments, it is those that are the most adaptable. That is true for airlines and airports too. Its already clear that Cargo, Biz Jet and Domestic travel is doing better than the rest and likely to continue to be for some time.

Lastly, those with cash in the bank will bounce back first (Ryanair in Europe). Many of the others will shrink probably by 30% or disappear.

SOU will bump along with the Channel Islands traffic and some domestic, the airport's challenge is - like the others - to find a way to operate with a cost level that is viable. That means shorter hours, fewer staff, and keeping cash in the bank until the revenue rolls in again rather faster than costs are going out of the door.

At least even now, its rather busier than the cruise port down the road!

FF

[RW20]

Council decision expected before Xmas and fully expect it to be approved with conditions!
​​​​​​On what basis do you conclude this statement?
The airport like many others is in dire straits,why invest in the rwy extension when the future is at best very unsure?

[SWBKCB]

​​​​​​On what basis do you conclude this statement?
The airport like many others is in dire straits,why invest in the rwy extension when the future is at best very unsure?

They've all ready invested money in the planning process, so it makes sense to continue. They then have a period of time (4 years?) before the planning permission lapses. Plenty of time to see what the recovery is like.

[The Nutts Mutts]

​​​​​​On what basis do you conclude this statement?
The airport like many others is in dire straits,why invest in the rwy extension when the future is at best very unsure?

Just because you desperately don't want it to happen, doesn't make it a bad idea for a business to invest in infrastructure improvements with a huge potential for return.

[stewyb]

​​​​​​On what basis do you conclude this statement?
The airport like many others is in dire straits,why invest in the rwy extension when the future is at best very unsure?

I think other posters have summed it up nicely, let’s wait and see who’s right!!

[rog747]

Originally I thought the expansion was to cater for existing aircraft that use the airport to allow them to fly further with greater payloads, now it's being reported its make or break time that if approval isn't granted the A320's and 737's won't be flocking in, so which is it?

You were correct in your first sentence - SOU have said all along ''to cater for existing aircraft (A319/320 type) that use the airport to allow them to fly further with greater payloads''

Sady though it has all now changed -
Flybe gone
Most countries recently served from SOU pre-covid are now all under no-go rules and quarantine, including IOM Eire, and the C.I.'s
work from home so no Business traffic on UK Domestic
Cruise ships nope
SEN (SOU's model?) is basically now half closed down and EZY have pulled out for good

yes it's bad, EXT is more or less in the same boat albeit with a longer runway and better parking

[southside bobby]

Not much of a future business model relying on the likes of Eastern Airways perhaps & even Logan.

[RW20]

Just because you desperately don't want it to happen, doesn't make it a bad idea for a business to invest in infrastructure improvements with a huge potential for return.
I rest my case with this sort of reply,how would anybody not want investment in a structure like SOU that would give potential jobs and safeguard existing employment?
The reality is that Covid 19 is here to stay,and investment capital in a runway extension in these times is just not a viable action,the airport in normal times would flourish with the improved runway TODA ,although perhaps it's not a great improvement?

[The Nutts Mutts]

The problem is that you've never presented a balanced opinion in anything you've said on this thread before, so it's hard to take anything you say seriously when 100% of the time your contributions are vehemently anti-SOU and seemingly taking great delight in its current struggles and imagined future demise.
As someone connected to SOU please forgive me if I don't have a lot of time for your viewpoint. I don't tend to take a tribal view of airports or treat them like diehard football fans treat their teams, but it seems that quite a few people on this website do.
My assumption is that you're a BOH spotter who sees any SOU expansion as a perceived threat to his "personal" airport, and responds in the only way possible, by denigrating the thing they're scared of.
I may be wrong and frequently am, but one thing I'm sure of is that your posts add nothing to the debate on this thread, being from such a consistently biased standpoint.
Yes, COVID is with is and no, we don't know how long for or what the ultimate effect on our economy will be. However, AGS are STILL keen and willing to invest money in SOU so you know what? I'll take that as a positive sign and choose to trust their informed judgement over your uninformed trolling.

[LGS6753]

The council's decision won't be made on viability grounds, but against the planning criteria it uses. Whether the expansion is "a good idea" or financially viable is irrelevant.

[Rivet Joint]

The Nutts Mutts

Well said. Glad to see someone else tackling this issue. You would think someone would get bored after a while of repeating the same thing over and over for what must be at least a year now. It is certainly not healthy to have such an irrational hatred of an inanimate object. I suspect you are on to something with the BOH spotter angle, or perhaps it’s an ex employee of SOU. Either way, people need to bite their tongue and ignore the bait but I can understand why you reacted.

Back to a healthy debate, some interesting points re the effectiveness of the runway extension. I think it’s fair to say SOU will have done their research though, or more to the point the numerous highly qualified individuals who will have been paid very well to carry out surveys and compile reports. Shareholders don’t consent to £15m capital being set aside on a whim, a credible business plan would have first been presented and a return evidenced. Yes the world is a different place currently but it will pick up again eventually. I use to make jokes on this thread that the only investment SOU ever saw was some new toilet seats and never dreamed that the runway would ever be extended. I also never dreamed that the day significant investment finally materialised this thread would be so negative about it. Luckily, when it comes to reality I too expect the planning to be issued rather than refused.

[TCAS FAN]

Council decision expected before Xmas and fully expect it to be approved with conditions!

As B***dy Awful Airports Plc gave away the family silver to ease through the airport re-development (resulting in the current night use restrictions) am somewhat at a loss to think what further conditions could be attached to airport use without having a commercially adverse impact.

[RW20]

TCAS FAN,
A valid point,but as always Stewyb,Nutts Mutts and the fantasiiezer Rivet Joint live in a pre covid world of what they think will happen.
The reality is the airport is in a very uncertain place and needs to survive,we ALL hope this will happen.
Oh and responding to Rivet Joints over thinking,I live close to the airport,flown many times from it and was a spotter there when the airport had a hard runway installed

[stewyb]

RW20 - as ever my personal views only and am fully aware of the current world we live in. With regards to conditions attached to an approval, I would imagine strict flight paths, noise control with residents compensation, local roads traffic control and airport access restrictions!

[LTNman]

Seven of Flybe’s most profitable international routes were from Southampton.
https://www.anna.aero/2020/10/23/flybe-had-15-international-routes-with-16m-profit-in-2019-rdcs-apex-shows-11-still-unserved/

[stewyb]

Seems EZY are reducing winter capacity on GVA and KLM are removing themselves for the next few months. However informed KLM remain fully committed to the airport long term!

[MARKEYD]

No surprise at all as most European countries are closing down again
Blue Islands are also going back to 1 flight a day due to Jersey imposing a 14 day quarantine on nearly all arrivals

[stewyb]

Planning application goes in front of council committee on 17th December!

[RW20]

Its debatable that many regional airports will survive,SOU is one of them,the runway extension is vital for any long term future
With the prospect of long time covid, Bournemouth looks like being able to ride out the storm,however SOU needs to encourage GA more
The airport is probably entering its most critical period,let's hope it can ride it out.

[MARKEYD]

Looks like Easy jet have pretty much chopped the Geneva service until February now
2 flights are operational in Dec for Christmas and re starts again in February

Similar for KLM who look to be restarting in mid February as well to Amsterdam

[HershamBoys]

"SOU needs to encourage GA more"
Not unless GA pays a meaningful rate...which the lighter end of GA probably won't want to pay. Aviation revenue derived from GA will never plug the hole created by the lost non-aviation revenue associated with passenger operations.....car parking, shops, cafes, advertising etc etc. An increase in top end GA possibly might help, but even then, without havng a revenue breakdown , it probably wouldn't help that much, and SOU would be trying to draw traffic from established top end GA airfields...e.g. Biggin and Farnborough. Reality is hitting home.

HB

[adfly]

TUI now have S22 on sale. SOU-PMI is unchanged from S21 - 2x weekly Tues/Sat and currently down to be flown by Volotea.

[stewyb]

New Terma radar being installed at the airport, good to see investment still being made!

[RW20]

New Terma radar being installed at the airport, good to see investment still being made!
what model are they installing?

[stewyb]

what model are they installing?

Glasgow AGS has the SCANTER 4002!

[stewyb]

Rumour has it Air France are looking at some French routes!

[planedrive]

Even Heathrow doesn't have routeS to France with Air France. I would file this one under unlikely to impossible.

[The Nutts Mutts]

Even Heathrow doesn't have routeS to France with Air France. I would file this one under unlikely to impossible.

LHR to CDG is definitely Air France. Unless you meant regional France.
Personally I'll believe it when I see an Air France plane on the tarmac at SOU, particularly from a French regional destination. I'd say if it happens at all it'll most likely be a CDG connection rather than replacing Flybe's French network.

[AirportPlanner1]

Hop definitely do some international routes from regional airports including former BE destinations so certainly not a rumour to write off

[planedrive]

LHR to CDG is definitely Air France. Unless you meant regional France.
Personally I'll believe it when I see an Air France plane on the tarmac at SOU, particularly from a French regional destination. I'd say if it happens at all it'll most likely be a CDG connection rather than replacing Flybe's French network.

Hence the emphasis on the S of routeS. Nowhere in the UK is linked to regional France via Air France or any subsidiary thereof. So the 'rumour' of Air France routeS to Southampton is pure fantasy in my opinion.

[Buster the Bear]

Brilliant if it happened to link in with the Air France worldwide network.

[adfly]

Will be interesting to see if anything comes of this. Looking back at the past Air France did briefly put weekly summer flights to Lyon and Nantes on sale in 2012 from Southampton, although they never actually operated them. Even then I don't think they flew many/any regional French routes from other UK airports - Birmingham to Lyon maybe?

Of course they also served CDG then Orly for well over 20 years, and more again if you consider the codeshare with Flybe they had.

[The Nutts Mutts]

StewyB - are you able to say where the rumour has come from? Is it credible?

[stewyb]

StewyB - are you able to say where the rumour has come from? Is it credible?

Someone who has their ear to the ground. Time will tell I guess if any truth to it!

[Wycombe]

I believe some of the regional France routes were pretty good for Flybe out of SOU, I'm thinking Bergerac (which operated year round) and to a lesser extent the likes of Nantes, Limoges, La Rochelle, Avignon. Are any of those Hop bases?

[SKOJB]

Positive news for SOU if true and could see Paris, Nantes (Hop HQ) and Brive (Hop destination) being involved. AF are looking to scale down their domestic timetable so may wish to take advantage of some short haul international!

[Rutan16]

Nantes might be the head office of HOP by Airfrance acquired via Règional CAE merger with Brit-air however their presence is rather diminished. Much of the international flying is done under the Transavia brand these day.

HOP retains a small presence at Renne and operates a reasonable range of AF flights from Bordeaux .

They also operate shuttle and seasonal flights from the many Breton, Loire, Charentes, and Aquitaine airfields in to Paris

Nantes pourrait être le siège social de HOP by Airfrance acquis via la fusion régionale CAE avec Brit-air mais leur présence est plutôt réduite. Une grande partie des vols internationaux se fait sous la marque Transavia ces jours-ci.

HOP conserve une petite présence à Renne et opère une gamme raisonnable de vols AF au départ de Bordeaux.

Ils opèrent également des navettes et des vols saisonniers depuis les nombreux aérodromes bretons, Loire, charentes et aquitain jusqu'à Paris.

[Flightrider]

AF have not filed any schedules / slots for SOU for Summer 2021 either at SOU or at the French coordinated airports like CDG and NTE.

They did so a few years ago for a smattering of weekend regional French routes - I think it was 2017 but haven't done since.

Another carrier is clearly very interested in the SOU weekend leisure markets though.

[adfly]

KLM are now bookable for S21. Still 14 weekly and at the same times, morning flight is on an E175 and evening on an E190 (E175 on Sat).

[Rivet Joint]

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/community/building-projects/stoneham-exhibition.page

It looks like the vacant tower block in Stoneham is due to be demolished within the next year (see above link). At 17 stories and not far south of the runway perhaps this could result in improved runway performance?

[stewyb]

Under Civil Aviation Authority designations, the northernmost 150 metres of the extension would be classified as a ‘starter strip’, with the remaining 14 metres as a ‘runway extension’

Runway Measurement Current declared distance (m) Future declared distance (m)
02 TORA 1723 1745
02 TODA 1831 1805
02 ASDA 1723 1745
02 LDA 1650 1673

20 TORA 1650 1814
20 TODA 1805 1874
20 ASDA 1650 1814
20 LDA 1605 1605

[dixi188]

Under Civil Aviation Authority designations, the northernmost 150 metres of the extension would be classified as a ‘starter strip’, with the remaining 14 metres as a ‘runway extension’

Runway Measurement Current declared distance (m) Future declared distance (m)
02 TORA 1723 1745
02 TODA 1831 1805
02 ASDA 1723 1745
02 LDA 1650 1673

20 TORA 1650 1814
20 TODA 1805 1874
20 ASDA 1650 1814
20 LDA 1605 1605

Why does the 02 TODA reduce?

[22/04]

Why does the 02 TODA reduce?

I don't know the Southampton area but does the increased TORA bring you closer to an obstacle or reduce the stopway distance.

[stewyb]

I don't know the Southampton area but does the increased TORA bring you closer to an obstacle or reduce the stopway distance.

A detailed analysis is on the council planning portal and worth a look!

[Musket90]

The TORA and ASDA length for both 02 and 20 are the same so a stopway is not declared for either direction. The most likely reason for 02 slight increase in TORA is runway end safety area (RESA) length overrun being adjusted slightly where the new pavement is being constructed. The runway 20 overrun RESA is unchanged. The reduction in TODA by 16m for runway 02 may be due to adjustments being made to the location of a couple of runway 20 elevated approach lights which will be slightly nearer to the runway 02 end resulting in the first obstacle being slightly closer.

[Sharklet_321]

Under Civil Aviation Authority designations, the northernmost 150 metres of the extension would be classified as a ‘starter strip’, with the remaining 14 metres as a ‘runway extension’

Runway Measurement Current declared distance (m) Future declared distance (m)
02 TORA 1723 1745
02 TODA 1831 1805
02 ASDA 1723 1745
02 LDA 1650 1673

20 TORA 1650 1814
20 TODA 1805 1874
20 ASDA 1650 1814
20 LDA 1605 1605




Forgive me, but if this is the only benefit to the extension, what on earth is the point??? It just seems like RW20 TORA benefits slightly but this is not the main departure runway given prevailing wind conditions.

[TCAS FAN]

Under Civil Aviation Authority designations, the northernmost 150 metres of the extension would be classified as a ‘starter strip’, with the remaining 14 metres as a ‘runway extension’

Runway Measurement Current declared distance (m) Future declared distance (m)
02 TORA 1723 1745
02 TODA 1831 1805
02 ASDA 1723 1745
02 LDA 1650 1673

20 TORA 1650 1814
20 TODA 1805 1874
20 ASDA 1650 1814
20 LDA 1605 1605

Much as I'd like to see it, can you explain the revised 20 declared distances as runway 02/20 is both by ICAO Annex 14 and CAP 168 criteria a Code 3 runway, due to its width being less than 45 metres. This accordingly limits declared distances to less than 1800 metres. This is the case with SEN who have a total paved surface of 1856 x 36 metres and accordingly have to limit their maximum declared distances to 1799 metres.

[stewyb]

Much as I'd like to see it, can you explain the revised 20 declared distances as runway 02/20 is both by ICAO Annex 14 and CAP 168 criteria a Code 3 runway, due to its width being less than 45 metres. This accordingly limits declared distances to less than 1800 metres. This is the case with SEN who have a total paved surface of 1856 x 36 metres and accordingly have to limit their maximum declared distances to 1799 metres.

I have taken this info from the airports Obstacle Surface Limitation Report on the planning portal. Whether its correct I have no idea!

[stewyb]

Forgive me, but if this is the only benefit to the extension, what on earth is the point??? It just seems like RW20 TORA benefits slightly but this is not the main departure runway given prevailing wind conditions.

Think you will find up to 70% of departures are from RW20!

[TCAS FAN]

I have taken this info from the airports Obstacle Surface Limitation Report on the planning portal. Whether its correct I have no idea!

Have looked at the subject Report. The airport consultants that wrote it recognise it as a Code 3 runway, then promptly go off and provide new declared distances that go outside the "less than 1800 metres" maximum for a Code 3 runway.

One thing that concerns me is the apparant lack of expertise of airport management who appear to have not picked up the error before the Report was submitted with the Planning Application.

[Rivet Joint]

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/community/building-projects/stoneham-exhibition.page

It looks like the vacant tower block in Stoneham is due to be demolished within the next year (see above link). At 17 stories and not far south of the runway perhaps this could result in improved runway performance?

TCAS FAN: Was this considered an obstacle during your time at SOU? It appears to be of similar distance as Marlhill Copse from the runway, just not immediately under it. The flights north do bank over the tower though and it is of course taller than the trees.

[Expressflight]

TCAS FAN

I looked into that anomaly when SEN was planning its runway extension. If the SEN TODA had been in excess of 1799m at that time it could have probably added to it by virtue of the pavement extension, but as it was less than 1799m the Code 3 TODA rule under CAP 168 applied. I can only assume that some form of Grandfather Rights are recognised by the CAA with respect to SOU.

[Musket90]

According to CAA web site Southampton has an EASA Certificate which states the runway is presently Code 4C. This presumably because the existing TODA for 02 and 20 exceeds 1799m. Maybe there is an exemption for the runway width being less than 45m and CAA has accepted it.

[virginblue]

In August 2003, I took a flight on the short-lived Flybe route Bergamo - Southampton (on Q400 G-JEDJ), connecting at SOU to flight BE998 to BHD (on Q200 G-JEDX). I have, as you can see, the regs of those flights in my log, but I am missing the flight number for the BGY-SOU flight. As I have neither a SOU nor a BE timetable from 2003 in my collection and Google has been useless, is anyone able to help out?

[Sharklet_321]

If the benefit of a 10% increase in take off distance for 70% of flights only benefits incumbent equipment like ERJ-145's etc etc, then why doesn't SOU management focus on this which is a lot less controversial and more likely to get approved?! :ugh:

[TCAS FAN]

Musket90

There is a perfectly functioning Southampton-2 thread which declared distances are the current hot topic. Why start a new thread? If you want to add something come over and join us on Southampton-2!

[stewyb]

Sharklet_321

Because the extension will enable the airport to attract Airbus family aircraft and hopefully a LCC. Approval is the only realistic future and one I believe they will win!

[SWBKCB]

Looks like the moderators have been doing some housekeeping and creating new threads for some of the long running one's - thread starter gets allocated to the first post at the cut over point (well that's what happened to me on the new Newcastle thread!)

[Expressflight]

According to CAA web site Southampton has an EASA Certificate which states the runway is presently Code 4C. This presumably because the existing TODA for 02 and 20 exceeds 1799m. Maybe there is an exemption for the runway width being less than 45m and CAA has accepted it.

Maybe that is the reason but it seems a pretty significant CAA "exemption" as CAP 168 states that the minimum runway width for a Code 4 runway should be 45m while that at SOU is only 37m. It would be interesting to see the rational that SOU put forward to be granted that exemption.

[Red Four]

Usually the CAA would need to see a robust Safety Case that proves a net increase in overall runway safety levels before granting approval for any plans that require a derogation of 'grandfather rights' to be continued. Maintaining that the runway is a proper Code 4c runway -for the sake of a few metres TODA length - is hardly a net increase in safety, when the runway width is so out of kilter with the requirement.
I would imagine it will have to revert to a Code 3c to gain CAA approval.

[Dropoffcharge]

Because the extension will enable the airport to attract Airbus family aircraft and hopefully a LCC. Approval is the only realistic future and one I believe they will win!

I'm guessing you are referring to the same Airbus family LCC that have recently been undertaking many sale and lease backs on a number of their aircraft, downsizing bases across Europe and closing a UK base completely. I don't believe the above knight in shining armour is likely to come to SOU's rescue anytime soon, extension or not, SOU should be focusing on the likes of keeping Eastern, Logan and poss a Flybe2 interested.