Manchester-2

[zfw]

https://travelweekly.co.uk/articles/370969/virgin-atlantic-releases-re-shaped-summer-2021-schedule

Five points from Manchester will be served to Atlanta, Barbados, Los Angeles, Orlando and New York JFK.


No Vegas then?.

[zfw]

https://travelweekly.co.uk/articles/370969/virgin-atlantic-releases-re-shaped-summer-2021-schedule

Five points from Manchester will be served to Atlanta, Barbados, Los Angeles, Orlando and New York JFK.


No Vegas then?.

[BHX5DME]

No Vegas then?.

Vegas gone
Delhi / Boston - not starting

[Curious Pax]

Vegas gone
Delhi / Boston - not starting

Boston was to be operated by Delta if that makes a difference?

[MKY661]

Virgin just confirmed on Twitter that Las Vegas has indeed gone.

[NorvernSuvna]

Most "Manchester bound" freight (that is with "MAN" on the air waybill) will arrive in Manchester by truck, be that from London, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Paris, Luxembourg or wherever else. Same for most airports in UK, EMA, for example is a major all cargo airport, but much traditional air freight, that is, not parcels shipped with integrators, will "land" at EMA (air waybill destination) by truck.

EMA has a lot of direct cargo flights from USA and mainland Europe, mainly through integrators and the likes of AeroLogic ( which I think is owned by DHL and Lufthansa ) , I was involved in some air cargo movements last week which arrived direct from CVG into EMA per Boeing 767, operated on behalf of DHL, but can't remember the actual carrier now.....and they were 20 tonnes paletised shipments, not parcels

[EMACargo]

EMA has a lot of direct cargo flights from USA and mainland Europe, mainly through integrators and the likes of AeroLogic ( which I think is owned by DHL and Lufthansa ) , I was involved in some air cargo movements last week which arrived direct from CVG into EMA per Boeing 767, operated on behalf of DHL, but can't remember the actual carrier now.....and they were 20 tonnes paletised shipments, not parcels
It will have been either Amerijet, ABX Air or CargoJet. They have all been running double daily flights from CVG to EMA if that helps

[NorvernSuvna]

It will have been either Amerijet, ABX Air or CargoJet. They have all been running double daily flights from CVG to EMA if that helps

OK many thanks, I should remember, but I can't - sorry !

[DomyDom]

LH returning with MAN-FRA 6 per week😊
https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2020/05/15/lufthansa-group-to-resume-flights-from-birmingham-dublin-edinburgh-and-manchester/

[HKGBOY]

Cathay appears to be bookable MAN-HKG from July 1st. Is this a definite "plan" or a leftover from the previous schedule? Maybe Spannersatcx has some news?

[TURIN]

Saudi 787 on its way and I hear another two are scheduled next week. Are these repat flights or just cargo?

[spannersatcx]

Cathay appears to be bookable MAN-HKG from July 1st. Is this a definite "plan" or a leftover from the previous schedule? Maybe Spannersatcx has some news?
As far as I know May/June cancelled, July would be dependent on what's happening in the UK I guess, they will be cancelled most likely at the end of May or beginning of June. Staff have been furloughed for May/June but not July as yet but as the scheme has been extended most likely July as well. I personally think August you may see something 🤞

[Curious Pax]

A normally reliable source is stating that Kuwait are starting 3x weekly with 330s from early July. I’d like it to be true but am somewhat stunned anyone would be launching a new route in that timeframe!

[gayrugbybloke]

A normally reliable source is stating that Kuwait are starting 3x weekly with 330s from early July. I’d like it to be true but am somewhat stunned anyone would be launching a new route in that timeframe!


could well be, Kuwait have been operating in sporadically over the last few months apparently

[JerseyAero]

could well be, Kuwait have been operating in sporadically over the last few months apparently

Only for recent repatriation flights as far as I recall

[HKGBOY]

Finnair to resume Helsinki from (sometime) in July https://www.airlive.net/finnair-to-resume-flights-to-40-destinations-from-july-1st/?fbclid=IwAR35kEo_CC2ERJTGeaw7hJDo8GJdVESrPkoxahBSvaJYEzcKet wweEl3dOg

[Navpi]

Kuwait is a scheduled flight. Not just repatriation.

[Curious Pax]

Kuwait is a scheduled flight. Not just repatriation.

The previous 777 flights were repatriation; the flights from July are scheduled.

[Brewster Buffalo]

May be wrong but I'm unsure Manchester can handle 747 freighters.

MAN acquring a fine collection of Virgin's 747s...all should be there by the end of this week...then what I wonder???

[Scottie Dog]

MAN acquring a fine collection of Virgin's 747s...all should be there by the end of this week...then what I wonder???
I've heard all the B744 are coming to MAN so that they can have engine swaps - original engines to original airframes - then off to the big yard in the desert.
Also I believe the A330s are then coming to us for storage.
Happy to be corrected if needs be.

[Mr Mac]

LH returning with MAN-FRA 6 per week😊
https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2020/05/15/lufthansa-group-to-resume-flights-from-birmingham-dublin-edinburgh-and-manchester/
DomyDom
Great to hear, just want Munich to be restarted, and I will be very happy . Getting a bit fed up of the multiple stops to and from especially as much of the infrastructure within the various routes I have used have been closed so long waits in empty terminals.
Cheers
Mr Mac

[TURIN]

I've heard all the B744 are coming to MAN so that they can have engine swaps - original engines to original airframes - then off to the big yard in the desert.
Also I believe the A330s are then coming to us for storage.
Happy to be corrected if needs be.
Why would they want to waste time and money moving engines around?
This is not a practice I have heard of before. Especially if the aircraft are being permanently withdrawn from service.

[JSCL]

Why would they want to waste time and money moving engines around?
This is not a practice I have heard of before. Especially if the aircraft are being permanently withdrawn from service.

It's completely normal? Depending on finance on engines or the airframes, they will need to be refitted back with their stated engines under whatever terms with the leasing company. It's an entirely normal practice to move engines around the fleet to balace usage and then to fit back their original engines with the frame to return to lessors. As I understand all of the VS fleet is financed in one way shape or form?

[spannersatcx]

Why would they want to waste time and money moving engines around?
This is not a practice I have heard of before. Especially if the aircraft are being permanently withdrawn from service.
We used to do it at BA, brand new 744 arrived from Boeing first thing we did was remove and replace engines, just to space out the lives of each engine fitted so they didn't all need overhaul/mods etc at the same time.
I would guess put the newest engines on the newest airframes VV the old ones, some would be more saleable than others as a result I imagine.

[zfw]

GVROY Finals 6 down ,1 to go.

[JerseyAero]

EZY have announced a number of routes they intend to startup again from June - mainly UK and France internal routes but no MAN services listed.

[TURIN]

Spanners, JSCL.

I know about the swapping engines at start of life to spread the overhaul across the fleet.

Engines get changed ad hoc due to failures or pending faults but what I'm talking about is the returning of the original engines back to the original airframe. An airframe that is being scrapped for example. Seems strange as the engines will be amongst the first items to be removed.

[JSCL]

Spanners, JSCL.

I know about the swapping engines at start of life to spread the overhaul across the fleet.

Engines get changed ad hoc due to failures or pending faults but what I'm talking about is the returning of the original engines back to the original airframe. An airframe that is being scrapped for example. Seems strange as the engines will be amongst the first items to be removed.

Yes but the original engines will belong to X financier or Y lessor relating to the aircraft in most cases.

If they've done various swaps which means they have different engines on the aircraft relating to a different financier, theyll revert them back to ensure they're returning the aircract with its appropriate engines. As its the financier/lessor that is really scrapping them, not VS as to my understanding they don't own them?

[Yeehaw22]

Spanners, JSCL.

I know about the swapping engines at start of life to spread the overhaul across the fleet.

Engines get changed ad hoc due to failures or pending faults but what I'm talking about is the returning of the original engines back to the original airframe. An airframe that is being scrapped for example. Seems strange as the engines will be amongst the first items to be removed.

as has been said the engines 'belong' to the aircraft so need returning. Same at any end of lease handback for engines, Apu and gear unless negotiated otherwise. Usually have to be in a preagreed condition aswell, whether that be by recently visiting the engine shop and/or confirmed by a video borescope. Otherwise they'll be big financial penalties.

Imagine if you were the owner of the newest 747 and it had 2 or 3 of the oldest engines. You wouldn't be happy.

These are the parts that will have the biggest value if the aircraft are going to be parted out.

[comet 4b623PW]

I am curious as to why this work is taking place in Manchester when VS have maintance hangers at both Heathrow and Gatwick.

[BHX5DME]

EZY have announced a number of routes they intend to startup again from June - mainly UK and France internal routes but no MAN services listed. UK

§ Belfast-Birmingham

§ Belfast-Bristol

§ Belfast-Edinburgh

§ Belfast-Glasgow

§ Belfast-London Gatwick

§ Belfast-Liverpool

§ Belfast-Newcastle

§ Birmingham-Belfast

§ Bristol-Belfast

§ Edinburgh-Belfast

§ Edinburgh-London Gatwick

§ Glasgow-Belfast

§ Glasgow-London Gatwick

§ Inverness-London Gatwick

§ Isle of Man-London Gatwick

§ Isle of Man-Liverpool

§ London Gatwick-Belfast

§ London Gatwick-Edinburgh

§ London Gatwick-Glasgow

§ London Gatwick-Inverness

§ London Gatwick-Isle of Man

§ London Gatwick-Nice

§ Liverpool-Belfast

§ Liverpool-Isle of Man

§ Newcastle-Belfast

France

§ Bordeaux-Lyon

§ Bordeaux-Nice

§ Paris Charles de Gaulle-Nice

§ Paris Charles de Gaulle-Toulouse

§ Lille-Nice

§ Lyon-Bordeaux

§ Lyon-Nantes

§ Nice-Bordeaux

§ Nice-Paris Charles de Gaulle

§ Nice-London Gatwick

§ Nice-Lille

§ Nice-Nantes

§ Nice-Toulouse

§ Nice-Geneva

§ Nantes-Lyon

§ Nantes-Nice

§ Toulouse-Paris Charles de Gaulle

§ Toulouse-Nice

Switzerland

§ Geneva-Porto

§ Geneva-Barcelona

§ Geneva-Lisbon

§ Geneva-Nice

Spain

§ Barcelona-Geneva

Portugal

§ Porto-Geneva

§ Lisbon-Geneva

[160to4DME]

Most MAN routes seem to be loaded from July 1st.

[TURIN]

as has been said the engines 'belong' to the aircraft so need returning. Same at any end of lease handback for engines, Apu and gear unless negotiated otherwise. Usually have to be in a preagreed condition aswell, whether that be by recently visiting the engine shop and/or confirmed by a video borescope. Otherwise they'll be big financial penalties.

Imagine if you were the owner of the newest 747 and it had 2 or 3 of the oldest engines. You wouldn't be happy.

These are the parts that will have the biggest value if the aircraft are going to be parted out.

Fair enough, makes sense. This leasing lark is a nightmare. I still have questions but I'll leave it here.

[zfw]

GVXLG Finals 7 of 7

[Ex Cargo Clown]

EMA has a lot of direct cargo flights from USA and mainland Europe, mainly through integrators and the likes of AeroLogic ( which I think is owned by DHL and Lufthansa ) , I was involved in some air cargo movements last week which arrived direct from CVG into EMA per Boeing 767, operated on behalf of DHL, but can't remember the actual carrier now.....and they were 20 tonnes paletised shipments, not parcels

20 tonne pallet? are you sure?

[Flying Hi]

20 tonne pallet? are you sure?
Insert word 'of' and try again?

[MANFOD]

Most MAN routes seem to be loaded from July 1st.

Yes, as someone seemed to delight in posting a long list of easyjet services operating from mid-June but not MAN (on the pretext of replying to a quote that MAN wasn't listed), as this is the MAN thread, I'm glad you pointed out that flights are loaded from 1 July. Prices are shown for quite a wide range of destinations, including multi-daily flights to the likes of AMS, BFS & CDG.
I wonder how many seats are available on a/c.

[MKY661]

Yes, as someone seemed to delight in posting a long list of easyjet services operating from mid-June but not MAN (on the pretext of replying to a quote that MAN wasn't listed), as this is the MAN thread, I'm glad you pointed out that flights are loaded from 1 July. Prices are shown for quite a wide range of destinations, including multi-daily flights to the likes of AMS, BFS & CDG.
I wonder how many seats are available on a/c.


Flights for July are loaded atm but I would imagine a lot of them will be taken off sale in a few weeks time. This was the case in April, May & June.

[MANFOD]

MKY661, you may well be right of course, particularly if this (unwarranted in the view of many) quarantine policy is extended beyond June, or so little notice is given of its cessation that folk won't have booked flights.

[Mr A Tis]

I doubt there will be any rush of bookings for any route, until the quarantine issue is resolved and secondly, the FCO advice on overseas travel - which impacts "most" peoples travel insurance. Given the way refund matters have been dealt with by many airlines, this pay now & don't worry you can change/refund if cancelled- isn't going to cut the mustard with many. The majority will simply wait until both the above issues are resolved. The rare exception might be with Jet2 who have performed very well with customer refunds, thereby inspiring confidence in change/refunds if flights are cancelled. (All Jet2 flights cancelled until July 1st)

[eggc]

The rare exception might be with Jet2 who have performed very well with customer refunds, thereby inspiring confidence in change/refunds if flights are cancelled. (All Jet2 flights cancelled until July 1st) Our household doesnt agree ! The Mrs swears she'll never use Jet2 again. I realise these companies need our money and issuing refunds would cripple them, but we never agreed to being an interst free loan company to them. I am not as fussy, I'll want a holiday as soon as and dont want Jet2 ( or others ) go bust really, so keeping my money doesnt bother me...Jet2's accessibility and taking then fully balance knowing the holiday would not be going ahead has driven the Mrs crazy....and no doubt thousands of others.

[Johnny F@rt Pants]

Our household doesnt agree ! The Mrs swears she'll never use Jet2 again. I realise these companies need our money and issuing refunds would cripple them, but we never agreed to being an interst free loan company to them. I am not as fussy, I'll want a holiday as soon as and dont want Jet2 ( or others ) go bust really, so keeping my money doesnt bother me...Jet2's accessibility and taking then fully balance knowing the holiday would not be going ahead has driven the Mrs crazy....and no doubt thousands of others.

So who will you use then, no other airline has done more or refunded as quickly? The fact that it will have taken them a while to process refunds is surely understandable in the circumstances.

[True Blue]

With maybe tens of thousands of passengers affected almost all at the same time, why do people believe that all these refunds should be made in a few days? How many do you think were disrupted at say Easyjet? Maybe if people would make a point of having some savings behind them then they wouldn't be standing waiting every minute for these refunds to appear. And don't start telling me that many of these passengers can't afford to have savings, far too many live to their limit every week in the belief that nothing will never go wrong, then when it does they are sunk.

[eggc]

We wanted to cancel, but she could not get hold of them, and then the date came where they automatically took the full balance for a holiday they clearly could not honour. Now I aint really bothered - we'll go at somepoint, but I bet there are families out there in the same boat that did not have that money to be taken as their position changed also. It was quite naughty TBH. Since they took the balance we have had 3 or 4 mails off them about options, but nothing before they had all they money...money which we did not want taking out of our bank.

[Flying Hi]

So who will you use then, no other airline has done more or refunded as quickly? The fact that it will have taken them a while to process refunds is surely understandable in the circumstances.
Quite so. Jet2s professionalism in refunding us has, if anything, reinforced our brand loyalty. Come 2021 (2020 is a dead duck now for us) we'll be comparing TUI's attitude to its Customers to Jet2 and others, if there are any and I cant see how ANYONE could trust TUI to do the right thing ever again.

[DomyDom]

Flights for July are loaded atm but I would imagine a lot of them will be taken off sale in a few weeks time. This was the case in April, May & June.
But by it's nature this is a fast changing situation that is kept under review. The situation is improving in the UK and in other European countries. If foreign office advice against all international travel is changed and quarantine requirements are lifted on our European neighbours I don't see why the flights would be taken off sale.

[DomyDom]

MAN-LUX returns 3 times a week (Fri Mon Wed) from 29th June on a Dash 8 courtesy of Luxair.😊

[NorvernSuvna]

20 tonne pallet? are you sure?

no , a palletised shipment, not 20 T on one pallet .......... it was just to differentiate that the shipment was general cargo and not parcels....

[Navpi]

Refunds are nothing to do with the Manchester thread.

Can they be moved to a general refund thread rather than hijack issues specific to Manchester.

[chinapattern]

MAN-LUX returns 3 times a week (Fri Mon Wed) from 29th June on a Dash 8 courtesy of Luxair.😊

Unlikely now UK borders are essentially closed!

[SCFC1EP]

Spanish Prime Minister has quoted today that Spain will be open to ALL tourists including BRITISH from July (no exact date given but ready how things are changing looks to be the 1st July) looking on Ryanair at PMI they've updated the schedule from 2 or 3 flights per day to just the one flight a early evening departure 2310hrs return into Manchester at least we will see aircraft in the late evening then, as currently last flight arrives around 1430hrs ex IOM/ABZ
Easyjet and Jet2 are showing various destinations bookable from 01/07/20, other airlines AY restart daily flight 1/7 and LH start late June 6 x weekly to FRA
July 1st seems to be restart some normality at least we should be able to go to Spain for holiday and not have to quarantine whilst there, this could be the first chance to get a nice pint in a pub...happy days...oops then we have to sit at home for 2 weeks afterwards oh well at least we had two weeks of freedom

[Flying Hi]

Spanish Prime Minister has quoted today that Spain will be open to ALL tourists including BRITISH from July (no exact date given but ready how things are changing looks to be the 1st July) looking on Ryanair at PMI they've updated the schedule from 2 or 3 flights per day to just the one flight a early evening departure 2310hrs return into Manchester at least we will see aircraft in the late evening then, as currently last flight arrives around 1430hrs ex IOM/ABZ
Easyjet and Jet2 are showing various destinations bookable from 01/07/20, other airlines AY restart daily flight 1/7 and LH start late June 6 x weekly to FRA
July 1st seems to be restart some normality at least we should be able to go to Spain for holiday and not have to quarantine whilst there, this could be the first chance to get a nice pint in a pub...happy days...oops then we have to sit at home for 2 weeks afterwards oh well at least we had two weeks of freedom

That Freedom is called The Sack. As an employer just trying to get things re-started and then my Work(shy)force wanting a 'pint in a pub' and being off for 4 weeks would be my last straw.

[DomyDom]

Unlikely now UK borders are essentially closed!
I think that the 14 day quarentine requirement is likely to be lifted at the beginning of July when the UK moves to phase 3 of the recovery plan. It's under continuous review anyway and like FCO advice not to travel it can change when circumstances change.

[DomyDom]

That Freedom is called The Sack. As an employer just trying to get things re-started and then my Work(shy)force wanting a 'pint in a pub' and being off for 4 weeks would be my last straw.
If quarentine requirements are lifted I don't see why anyone would need 4 weeks off work if they are fit and well.

[DomyDom]

Spanish Prime Minister has quoted today that Spain will be open to ALL tourists including BRITISH from July (no exact date given but ready how things are changing looks to be the 1st July) looking on Ryanair at PMI they've updated the schedule from 2 or 3 flights per day to just the one flight a early evening departure 2310hrs return into Manchester at least we will see aircraft in the late evening then, as currently last flight arrives around 1430hrs ex IOM/ABZ
Easyjet and Jet2 are showing various destinations bookable from 01/07/20, other airlines AY restart daily flight 1/7 and LH start late June 6 x weekly to FRA
July 1st seems to be restart some normality at least we should be able to go to Spain for holiday and not have to quarantine whilst there, this could be the first chance to get a nice pint in a pub...happy days...oops then we have to sit at home for 2 weeks afterwards oh well at least we had two weeks of freedom
I think the UK's 2 week quarantine rule.will be gone by July. Airlines I believe are confident of this which is why most post-June bookings are still standing. I am booked to fly MAN-VRN in mid-July with Jet2 and it hasn't been cancelled so far.

[Mister Geezer]

For those thinking of travelling but not made any plans yet, then consider travelling back to the UK via the Republic of Ireland, as you will be absolved of any quarantine regulations on arrival in the UK.

[eggc]

For those thinking of travelling but not made any plans yet, then consider travelling back to the UK via the Republic of Ireland, as you will be absolved of any quarantine regulations on arrival in the UK.

I am not sure thats correct Mister G ? Its dependant on your passport nationality and not where you arrive from isnt it ??

[papabravowhiskey]

I am not sure thats correct Mister G ? Its dependant on your passport nationality and not where you arrive from isnt it ??From the UK Govt website:
You will not need to fill in the form or self-isolate for 14 days if you’re travelling to the UK from:


Ireland
the Channel Islands
the Isle of Man


If you were tempted to try this route, you might want to buy a separate ticket for the RoI-UK leg rather than a through ticket ... and you'd need to stay "in transit" in DUB or SNN.
However, by the time that travel becomes possible, the quarantine regs might have been refined ...

[andy mach 1]

I am not sure thats correct Mister G ? Its dependant on your passport nationality and not where you arrive from isnt it ??


I do believe that you have to self quantine in the Irish Republic for 14 days if arriving from overseas, so this would invalidate a way of circumventing the UK self quarantine.

[inOban]

I thought that Ireland already had 14 day quarantine. At the moment you are exempt if processing to NI, but I'm sure that the two governments will have liaise on this.

[Mr A Tis]

The Irish arrival Quarantine form states exemptions

"The need to self-isolate does not apply to certain categories of passengers for example supply chain workers (such as pilots, hauliers or maritime crew members) or to passengers who are transiting en route to another jurisdiction, including Northern Ireland."

So, this implies if you transit to anywhere, then Irish self isolation is exempt.
Therefore, it is legit to fly to Dublin & get the bus to Belfast OR to take a flight to Manchester (or other UK destination) thus avoiding any self isolation.
Bonkers.

[SWBKCB]

So, this implies if you transit to anywhere, then Irish self isolation is exempt.

Depends - if you are transiting, are you coming from ROI or your original destination?

[Mister Geezer]

As was mentioned by papabravowhiskey, if you bought two separate tickets and cleared immigration and customs in ROI then checked in for your next flight to the UK, you have officially entered the ROI and have for all intents and purposes ended one journey and began a new journey from the ROI to the UK.

I have travelled numerous times in the past from the Middle East to the UK via AMS/FRA/CDG but on separate tickets, so I had to clear immigration and customs on the continent and then check in again for flying to the UK. My new baggage tag now had a green border showing this journey originated in the EU and allowed me to use the blue customs channel for intra-EU travel on arrival in the UK, which is no different to someone who began their journey in AMS/FRA/CDG.

Using the same analogy here, it would be permissible for you to claim you started your journey in the ROI, given the situation I described.

[SWBKCB]

you have officially entered the ROI and have for all intents and purposes ended one journey

So you'd have to quarantine there or be refused entry?

[DomyDom]

So you'd have to quarantine there or be refused entry?
But what if the ROI remove quarantine restrictions because the CV19 risk in Europe has diminished to negligable levels? What's to stop our traveller boarding a flight from Dublin or Belfast to mainland UK without showing their passport?

[Mister Geezer]

So you'd have to quarantine there or be refused entry?

Perhaps it would not be such a black and white scenario.

The website (https://www2.hse.ie/conditions/coronavirus/travel.html) for the Health Service Executive in ROI states the following:

The only people who do not need to self-isolate are people who are:

returning to the Republic of Ireland from Northern Ireland.
essential supply chain workers, for example, a pilot, haulier, maritime staff member.
briefly stopping over at an airport on their way to another country.

The definition of 'briefly stopping over at an airport' is very vague but it doesn't rule out entering ROI and remaining in the airport terminal for a few hours and then checking in again for another flight. That's just my interpretation. :ok: Should the quarantine period still exist by late July (which I doubt), then I shall be flying via DUB using separate tickets for getting to the UK.

[pwalhx]

Iran Air are due to start at Manchester on 13th June with a weekly flight to IKA.

Flight IR752 arriving into MAN at 0900
Flight IR753 departing MAN at 1030

Using A330

Credit to alpha5 on Facebook

[SCFC1EP]

Very surprising route and credit to aplha5, his posts are very reliable indeed.

with a start date in just over two weeks and using there largest aircraft A330 just makes me think they only have 2 A330s and one operates into LHR daily , the other A330 was usually on AMS or a Germany flight FRA/DUS and don't think you would get two return flights out of Iran to Europe in 24hrs, only other aircraft is Iran Air A300's 4 in fleet these only aircraft that seem to go into uk or wstern europe, they do a few old A319/A320 aircraft and a sole A321 newish build could they reach MAN

In other news Emirates goes daily 01/07/20 2nd daily 15/07/20 and third daily 01/09/20 all with A380's again very surprised with the short time between daily to two daily and 3 daily with A380's that's a lot of passengers when we are still coming out of lockdown and limited service with other airlines. Would have thought the B777 would be a better fit for at least one flight with the cargo and the fact EK are parking alot of A380'S

[A340600MAN]

Hi

Can someone please clarify/confirm (as of today) the following for me please.

New services going ahead - Iran Air A330 to Tehran from 13/6 .... Luxair DH8D to Luxembourg from 29/6 ..... Kuwait Airways A332 to Kuwait City from 3/7

New services cancelled - Air Baltic BCS3 Riga ... Blue Island AT72 Jersey ... Delta Air Lines B752 Boston ... Juneyao Airlines B789 Helsinki ... WestJet Airlines B737 Halifax.

I presume these cancellation will last until summer 21?

Regards

[TURIN]

The Delta and Juneyao are postponed, not cancelled.

[Rutan16]

Very surprising route and credit to aplha5, his posts are very reliable indeed.

with a start date in just over two weeks and using there largest aircraft A330 just makes me think they only have 2 A330s and one operates into LHR daily , the other A330 was usually on AMS or a Germany flight FRA/DUS and don't think you would get two return flights out of Iran to Europe in 24hrs, only other aircraft is Iran Air A300's 4 in fleet these only aircraft that seem to go into uk or wstern europe, they do a few old A319/A320 aircraft and a sole A321 newish build could they reach MAN

In other news Emirates goes daily 01/07/20 2nd daily 15/07/20 and third daily 01/09/20 all with A380's again very surprised with the short time between daily to two daily and 3 daily with A380's that's a lot of passengers when we are still coming out of lockdown and limited service with other airlines. Would have thought the B777 would be a better fit for at least one flight with the cargo and the fact EK are parking alot of A380'S
Iranair don’t fly daily into London haven’t for many years. Normally just 3 days a week .

The ONLY aircraft they are ALLOWED to operate into EASA airspace are the two A330s four A300 the A321and two aged A310s

Manchester has been connected to Tehran previously via Mahran and there are significant diasporas in Manchester of both Iranian and Iraqi origin and not a few Syrians that might find the routing somewhat useful especially Shia pilgrims going onto Qom, and Najaf

[Mr @ Spotty M]

The Delta Boston route has been cancelled for summer 20 season.

[Lancaster Bomber]

Iranair don’t fly daily into London haven’t for many years. Normally just 3 days a week .

The ONLY aircraft they are ALLOWED to operate into EASA airspace are the two A330s four A300 the A321and two aged A310s

Manchester has has been connected To Tehran previously via Mahran and there are significant diasporas in Manchester of both Iranian and Iraqi origin and not a few Syrians that might find the routing somewhat useful especially ShIa pilgrims going onto Qom, and Najaf

Did we not used to have a service to Damascus at one point, sure it was a 747SP but I may be mistaken.

[zfw]

Jet 2 shaking off the cobwebs today 2x 738 and 1 x757 out.

[JerseyAero]

New services going ahead - Iran Air A330 to Tehran from 13/6 .



I understand that the slots for this new Iran Air service only run until the end of Sept so appears to be a seasonal thing or maybe connected with students/repatriation?

[JerseyAero]

Did we not used to have a service to Damascus at one point, sure it was a 747SP but I may be mistaken.

There was a service to Damascus operated by Syrian Air using B747SP and later A320. I'd guess this was going back 10-15 years ago.

[Rutan16]

Old balls that have flown to and from Manchester on scheduled services include Sudan , Air Algerié, Mahran, Libyan, Iraqi, Syrian, and Cubana oh and Daalo ( albeit on Uk 757)

[crewmeal]

When Mahan Air or Iran Air flew into LHR they weren't allowed fuel because of the sanctions and therefore had to drop in at a non EU airport on the way back if my memory serves me correctly.

It will be interesting to see how MAN handle pax (if any) coming in from Tehran given that covid 19 is rife there.

[Rutan16]

MAHRAN have never served Heathrow though they have held slots for Gatwick in the past.

They have however operated into Manchester and Birmingham at differing times.

The fuelling issue remains . The American oil suppliers are barred from serving Iranian businesses by US sanctions whilst they also have banking issues that prevent many lines of credit and use of the US clearing systems .

The A330s can currently make it on round trip, occasional drops are made in Turkey and Italy at the moment where they are able acquire fuel either via local tanking (Turkey) or from Russian spot markets.

Iranair continue to serve Heathrow three weekly and off the record don’t be surprised if a certain UK citizens liberty and supply of UK pharmaceuticals are part of a rather more nuanced mini deal that may be going on.

[Nostoodian]

There was a service to Damascus operated by Syrian Air using B747SP and later A320. I'd guess this was going back 10-15 years ago.

Some lovely archive footage.
​​​​​​
https://youtu.be/Tld7sXB_I-Q

[VickersVicount]

MAHRAN have never served Heathrow though they have held slots for Gatwick in the past.

They have however operated into Manchester and Birmingham at differing times.

The fuelling issue remains . The American oil suppliers are barred from serving Iranian businesses by US sanctions whilst they also have banking issues that prevent many lines of credit and use of the US clearing systems .

The A330s can currently make it on round trip, occasional drops are made in Turkey and Italy at the moment where they are able acquire fuel either via local tanking (Turkey) or from Russian spot markets.

Iranair continue to serve Heathrow three weekly and off the record don’t be surprised if a certain UK citizens liberty and supply of UK pharmaceuticals are part of a rather more nuanced mini deal that may be going on.
I think Mahan operated on behalf of PK to GLA also when their A310 UK ops were subject to restrictions. Oh the irony...

[BHX5DME]

April 2020



MAN – 23,728 down 99.0%

STN – 13,708 down 99.4%

EMA – 59 pax !!

12m ended 30.04.20

MAN – 25,846,884 down 10.1%

STN – 24,507,8678 down 13.7%

EMA – 4,091,104 down 15.5%

Cargo April 2020

MAN – 987 tonnes down 88.8%

STN – 19,178 up 9.1%

EMA – 27,174 down 6.8%

[MARK 101]

April 2020



MAN – 23,728 down 99.0%

STN – 13,708 down 99.4%

EMA – 59 pax !!

12m ended 30.04.20

MAN – 25,846,884 down 10.1%

STN – 24,507,8678 down 13.7%

EMA – 4,091,104 down 15.5%

Cargo April 2020

MAN – 987 tonnes down 88.8%

STN – 19,178 up 9.1%

EMA – 27,174 down 6.8%
Surprised cargo was down, especially EMA , although this was April figures, imagine Mays will be significantly more

[Robin757]

Swiss have just announced that they are restarting their Zurich/Manchester service from mid June.

[planedrive]

easyJet have updated their schedules for July. Services resume 1st July to Alicante, Amsterdam, Belfast, Faro, Malaga, Palma, Paris and Tenerife. Later in the month sees the addition of a lot more destinations at reduced frequencies. Everything else removed from sale.

[MANFAN]

Is Hamburg also restarting too?

[planedrive]

Is Hamburg also restarting too?

Yes - but not until the second group (around the 15/16/17 of July). Full list operating in W/C 20th July is: Alicante, Amsterdam, Athens, Barcelona, Basel, Belfast, Berlin, Bilbao, Copenhagen, Corfu, Crete (Heraklion), Cyprus (Paphos), Faro, Geneva, Gibraltar, Hamburg, Jersey, Lanzarote, Lisbon, Malaga, Majorca, Malta, Munich, Paris CDG, Pisa, Prague, Sicily (Catania), Split, Tenerife South and Venice.
All for sale on the easyJet website.

[Navpi]

Concrete evidence suggests a tsunami of restarts from the main UK hubs of Heathrow and Manchester in June July August.

Not seen anything for the smaller regional airports like Bristol, Birmingham, Leeds etc

One wonders if airlines will consolidate at the majors ?

[BACsuperVC10]

Concrete evidence suggests a tsunami of restarts from the main UK hubs of Heathrow and Manchester in June July August.

Not seen anything for the smaller regional airports like Bristol, Birmingham, Leeds etc

One wonders if airlines will consolidate at the majors ?

Ryanair have published on their website a sizeable list of routes they plan to operate from various airports.

[spannersatcx]

As far as I know May/June cancelled, July would be dependent on what's happening in the UK I guess, they will be cancelled most likely at the end of May or beginning of June. Staff have been furloughed for May/June but not July as yet but as the scheme has been extended most likely July as well. I personally think August you may see something 🤞
July now cancelled :ouch:

[DomyDom]

July now cancelled :ouch:
spannersatcx, the EZY flights are on sale and bookable for July, as are FR and Jet2. Please can you clarify which airline has cancelled for July. Thanks.

[Scottie Dog]

I'm pretty certain he's referring to Cathay whom he is, I understand, employed by.

[DomyDom]

I'm pretty certain he's referring to Cathay whom he is, I understand, employed by.
Oh!:confused: Thanks Scottie Dog.😊

[HKGBOY]

I may be wrong, but I am hearing inbound quarantine into HKG has been extended until September. Restrictions on transits, however, has been lifted. Can't see Cathay coming back until inbound restrictions are lifted.
(That is quarantine for HKG residents- non residents are currently not allowed to stay)

From the SCMP re HKG entry."Compulsory quarantine will also apply until July 7 for travellers from mainland China, Macau and Taiwan, and September 18 for residents arriving from overseas.

The indefinite ban on non-residents flying into Hong Kong from abroad has also been continued"

My guess we will not see Cathay back at MAN until these restrictions are lifted.

[spannersatcx]

I'm pretty certain he's referring to Cathay whom he is, I understand, employed by.
Yes thanks, I quoted the original quote of a quote! if you click on the arrow next to originally posted by it takes you to the original post.

[Mr A Tis]

Manchester Airport are trialing a pre booked 15 minute window slot for passing through security. I'm curious as to how this works in practise. A passenger would not really know how long the check in- bag drop experience will take. Maybe OK with very few people, but if services ramp up- check in time could be unpredictable. Interesting experiment though. (By the way the security pre book is free)

[zed3]

Mr A tis, it's not only security and check in. The journey to the airport is also important, trains can be delayed, roads and car parking can be slow.

[Navpi]

Re security - To be honest it should I guess be applauded that they are actually doing something innovative.

They seemingly failed to capitalise on aircraft parking and they are not that keen to handle anything more than a handful of freighters a week.

[Mister Geezer]

Just out of interest, does anyone know when T2/T3 are likely to open again?

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Re security - To be honest it should I guess be applauded that they are actually doing something innovative.

They seemingly failed to capitalise on aircraft parking and they are not that keen to handle anything more than a handful of freighters a week.
As of last weekend there was one spot empty in the whole T2 remote parking area. Not sure randomly using the gates at T1 is a wise move as T2 was full and T3 a Ryanair parking lot. There’s no room to capitalise on this unless you want to use the second runway?
As ever, MAN remains really tight for space.

[chaps1954]

There must be few spots left now as the Dash 8 are leaving also the B747s are going but being replaced by a larger number of A330, Are the 900 stands due in operation soon?

[MANFOD]

There must be few spots left now as the Dash 8 are leaving also the B747s are going but being replaced by a larger number of A330, Are the 900 stands due in operation soon?

Good question about the new remote 900 stands. I think 925/927/929 were due to be operational back in April.
I expect Scottie Dog can confirm whether they are now in use. The group of 10 stands at the NW perimeter beyond Pier 1 (901-919 odd numbers only) as of a week or so ago were not yet commissioned as I understand it, although to all intents and purposes were complete. Again, any clarification would be appreciated.

To Skip's point, there has been some surprise that given the few movements on R1, R2 hasn't been put to use for temporary parking, or even one or two taxiways unless WIP is already causing taxiway restrictions.

[SWBKCB]

Won't anything that needs parking already be parked?

[chaps1954]

Not so as some of the PIA night stop as did the Saab 340 on Thursday

[spannersatcx]

Must be short of money as the airport are putting up all the office rents! Whereas LHR/LGW are giving rent reductions! :ugh:

[Scottie Dog]

MANFOD - I'm afraid I'm out of contact with regards to the 900 srands. The last aerial photo I saw seemed to I indicative that none of them are yet in use.

[MANFOD]

Thanks Scottie. If those remote stands were in use, it might enable the airport to handle some of those freight charters which, unlike other airports, MAN are allegedly turning away. It would be interesting to know why the airport decided not to use R2 for temporary parking given that it's likely to be a long time before traffic gets back to a level which justifies its return to operations. Of course, in the past R2 has proved its worth for emergencies and when R1 has been closed for maintenance but I'm not sure how that would apply now.

[SWBKCB]

It would be interesting to know why the airport decided not to use R2 for temporary parking

Was there any demand for it?

[750XL]

Logistical nightmare parking stuff that far away from the terminals, with engineers/service partners wanting to go to/from etc requiring airfield ops escorts all the time.

[MAN777]

I would think parking aircraft on RW2 is more trouble than its worth, what happens if you have a closure of RW1 for whatever reason. It would take a long time to shift a row of aircraft. Also carrying out ongoing servicing of the runway surface would be impossible, also long term parking of heavy leaking aircraft may actually cause damage to the runway. And lastly carrying out storage service routines on the aircraft would be difficult as its part of the runway and taxiway system, very few people are permitted or qualified to drive there.

[Scottie Dog]

Thank you 750XL and MAN777 for your explanations.

[750XL]

Just another few points that popped into my head re parking aircraft on 23L

As previously mentioned, anybody needing to get to/from the aircraft will need an escort as few are permitted to drive there
The airport is running on skeleton staff, probably not enough people to tow aircraft over there
Should the airline go bust, MAG are left with a few expensive lumps of scrap metal taking up the runway. These things can't easily be towed around, look how long it took the TCX A330's to move from the 60's over towards T2
In the grand scheme of things, MAG don't actually charge a lot for aircraft parking. Barely seems worth the effort for them imo

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/506x423/clipboard01_159941b5b6434c01c3ae353566265cb58dfc3fe6.jpg
https://www.magairports.com/media/1584/man-fees-and-charges-booklet-2019_20.pdf

[MANFOD]

Was there any demand for it?

My understanding is that there were enquiries from several airlines, including BA, for additional parking facilities which MAN felt they had to turn down. Then there are all those extra freighters into and out of the UK at present which for whatever reason are going elsewhere. (there have been a few flights with freight only by airlines that are regular MAN customers on scheduled passenger services e.g. EK and I think HU). So there has been a demand for space.

ps thanks 750XL for those comments and the list of charges for aircraft parking.

The explanations offered why RW2 might not be suitable are no doubt valid, but my original point was that the new remote stands could have proved useful were they in use.

[Curious Pax]

Interesting that it’s cheaper to park your sub 10 tonne aircraft at MAN than it is to leave your car in the multi storey for the day!

[zfw]

Hearing from colleagues still working at the coal face that security are letting workers in with 2 litres of liquid, any confirmation?

[Yeehaw22]

Hearing from colleagues still working at the coal face that security are letting workers in with 2 litres of liquid, any confirmation?

Its a uk wide temporary allowance to allow staff to take in liquids as usual places to buy drinks are all closed.

[commit aviation]

Once again the topic of freight rears it's head!

Don't forget that MAN is part of MAG where the G stands for Group. If it is a MAG decision then I imagine they have determined that financially freight is best handled through EMA and STN rather than MAN.
However it isn't necessarily an airport decision anyway. It could just as easily be lack of equipment (which would be down to handlers) or airline choice to fly elsewhere.

[MKY661]

I wonder if Air Canada Rouge will be returning following that they have now withdrawn the 767. Can't see anything bookable on their site

[SCFC1EP]

If Air Canada finally purchases Air Transat, then i think we will see the A330's as Air Canada Rogue If they don't purchase Air Transat we will still see Air Transat
It was always a short seasonal operation and if they did go ahead with Air Transat we probably would have had a reduce frequency anyway
Unless Air Canada mainline takes over with B738 max if the future or if Air Canada Rogue gets some A321LR then no I don't think we will see a return in the near future

[Scottie Dog]

I wonder if Air Canada Rouge will be returning following that they have now withdrawn the 767. Can't see anything bookable on their site

Definitely gone for S20. As has subsequently been said if will depend on what happens with regards to TSC.

[chaps1954]

Thought AC had pulled out of TSC deal last week

[Navpi]

The topic of frieght rears its head because I have former colleagues still struggling daily with supply chain issues in the NHS.

One of the procurement staff in a hospital I'm close to in the N West read out an airway bill where the supply had come in via Cardiff. Even they raised an eyebrow suggesting

"I thought this would have come in via Manchester or Liverpool. When they queried this they were told by the shipping company there is no capacity at Manchester or indeed Liverpool ?

These goods had been sat in S Wales since last Monday despite the North of England having a major international gateway serving 5 major cities and being at the centre of one of the largest population areas in Europe.

The Manchester airport board should be DEMANDING that these goods are shipped direct.

Dressing this up as a finance issue is absolutely ludiocrous.

Is Manchester so threadbare that there are no staff available to execute even the semblance of a basic operation?

Maybe it's time they got the army in to run the place.

All I'm hearing is excuse after excuse after excuse in everything that Manchester does. Its light years away from the "can do " attitude when the likes of Peter Hampson and Chris Walkden were running the show.

If Manchester is full , rather than everyone sit on their collective hands why are we not able to tow a unit off for 3 hours , handle a feight movement then tow it back or is that "too hard".

Are we so overburdened that handling 6 movements a day gives everyone in Olympic House a nervous breakdown?

As for refusing to park aircraft on RW2 because of the logistics, I would suggest we send management down to Bournemouth or Cardiff. They currently have aircraft shoehorned into every availble part of the airfield but somehow seem able to cope quite easily with 120plus stored units.. and handle NHS A340 movements on a daily basis.

[UnderASouthernSky]

The topic of frieght rears its head because I have former colleagues still struggling daily with supply chain issues in the NHS.

One of the procurement staff in a hospital I'm close to in the N West read out an airway bill where the supply had come in via Cardiff. Even they raised an eyebrow suggesting

"I thought this would have come in via Manchester or Liverpool.

These goods had been in S Wales since last Monday despite the North of England having a major international gateway serving 5 major cities.

Dressing this up as a finance issue is absolutely ludiocrous.

Is Manchester so threadbare that there are no staff available to execute even the semblance of a basic operation?

Maybe it's time they got the army in to run the place.

All I'm hearing is excuse after excuse after excuse in everything that Manchester does. Its light years away from the "can do " attitude when the likes of Peter Hampson and Chris Walkden were running the show.

If Manchester is full , rather than everyone sit on their collective hands why are we able not able to tow a unit off for 3 hours , handle a feight movement then tow it back or is that "too hard".

Are we so overburdened that handling 6 movements a day gives everyone in Olympic House a nervous breakdown?

As for refusing to park aircraft on RW2 because of the logistics, I would suggest we send management down to Bournemouth or Cardiff. They currently have aircraft shoehorned into every availble part of the airfield but somehow seem able to cope quite easily with 124 stored aircraft..... and handle NHS movements on a daily basis.

How do you know that 90% of the PPE on the flight to Cardiff wasn't destined for facilities in Wales/West of England/South West? In which case the preference could be to take the flight into an airport closer to the majority of end users. We clearly don't have enough knowledge about loads, flight, landing & handling costs and how the NHS supply chain works to answer this topic. There may also be a pr/political angle to certain airports wanting to be seen to be accepting these flights.

[MAN777]

NAVPI

Comparing Bournemouth to MAN is comparing apples and oranges. One is a rambling old site with acres of old taxiways and a tiny operation at the best of times, the other is a very large multi billion site with a worldwide operation that has slowed but will begin to pick up rapidly in the next couple of months.
If you loose a single runway for whatever reason thats it, game over, if you have the luxury of a second runway that can be re opened rapidly that is a major attraction to airlines. Runway 2 at MAN is predominantly of asphalt construction it has a PCN sufficient for all aircraft types, however its very expensive runway surface could be susceptible to asphalt degradation should any fuel or oils leak onto the surface from a stored airliner, that then could becomes an expensive repair bill. The asphalt used on a runway is part of a finely engineered surface that has to cope with the weight, exhaust temperature and thrust of aircraft and provide friction characteristics that allow safe braking and steering at high speed, thats why aprons are usually made of tough thick Concrete that can withstand prolonged weights and leaky old Virgin 747s !

[MANFOD]

How do you know that 90% of the PPE on the flight to Cardiff wasn't destined for facilities in Wales/West of England/South West? In which case the preference could be to take the flight into an airport closer to the majority of end users. We clearly don't have enough knowledge about loads, flight, landing & handling costs and how the NHS supply chain works to answer this topic. There may also be a pr/political angle to certain airports wanting to be seen to be accepting these flights.

So are you suggesting that the NW has no demand for PPE and other equipment in its own right with its significant population and large hospitals for example in the vicinity of the two airports? It's the absence of such direct flights here in recent weeks that's difficult to understand. And I suspect NAVPI has rather more knowledge of how the NHS supply chain works than you assume.

[BHX5DME]

So are you suggesting that the NW has no demand for PPE and other equipment in its own right with its significant population and large hospitals for example in the vicinity of the two airports? It's the absence of such direct flights here in recent weeks that's difficult to understand. And I suspect NAVPI has rather more knowledge of how the NHS supply chain works than you assume.

Yes seems strange that MAN are not getting any of these flights, BHX are also getting lots of Russian freighters, an Azul 763 inbound shortly and two 777's this week too.

[MANFOD]

Yes seems strange that MAN are not getting any of these flights, .
Strange maybe, but not a total surprise to some of us.

Quoting Navpi:
If Manchester is full , rather than everyone sit on their collective hands why are we not able to tow a unit off for 3 hours , handle a freight movement then tow it back or is that "too hard".
Quite right. And this wouldn't necessarily involve R2. Finding somewhere on the airfield to temporarily park an aircraft that's not going anywhere else while a freighter is handled wouldn't seem to be mission impossible. We're not talking 10 freighters a day or other large movements of a/c happening on the airfield.

Like NAVPI, I well remember the days when the kind of people he mentions under the leadership of the late Sir Gil Thompson had a more proactive 'can-do' approach. There is a perception, rightly or wrongly, that this is no longer the case. As we eventually come out of this crisis, it's a perception that MAN needs to dispel.

[SWBKCB]

Rather than space, I would imagine labour is more of an issue. Emptying a widebody that has been bulk loaded isn't a trivial task, where are the people to do the odd flight?

[Navpi]

Rather than space, I would imagine labour is more of an issue. Emptying a widebody that has been bulk loaded isn't a trivial task, where are the people to do the odd flight?

.....if MAN has no staff give Doncaster, Birmingham, East Midlands, Bournemouth, or Cardiff a call.

They seem to have plenty staff.

[Navpi]

NAVPI

Comparing Bournemouth to MAN is comparing apples and oranges. One is a rambling old site with acres of old taxiways and a tiny operation at the best of times, the other is a very large multi billion site with a worldwide operation that has slowed but will begin to pick up rapidly in the next couple of months.
If you loose a single runway for whatever reason thats it, game over, if you have the luxury of a second runway that can be re opened rapidly that is a major attraction to airlines. Runway 2 at MAN is predominantly of asphalt construction it has a PCN sufficient for all aircraft types, however its very expensive runway surface could be susceptible to asphalt degradation should any fuel or oils leak onto the surface from a stored airliner, that then could becomes an expensive repair bill. The asphalt used on a runway is part of a finely engineered surface that has to cope with the weight, exhaust temperature and thrust of aircraft and provide friction characteristics that allow safe braking and steering at high speed, thats why aprons are usually made of tough thick Concrete that can withstand prolonged weights and leaky old Virgin 747s !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With all due respect I think we are once again looking at what we can't do versus what we can and indeed should be doing.

I honestly don't think we are going to need a 2nd runway for months if not years quite frankly..

That's point 1 but if the mindset is wrapping it in kid gloves, given the highly remote chance we may have fuel ingress or need to use it in case of an emergency with 6 movements per day , whilst potentially losing £1m+ revenue we really have lost our way.

Yes traffic will increase in the weeks to come but saving RW2 on a "just in case basis" seems to be taking precautions to the extreme.

The board of MAG whilst mindful of the potential issues MAN777 raises need to be equally aware of striking a balance.

Feight clearly bound for users in the N West needs to be shipped to the N West and not a sprinkling of airports 4 and 5 hours away with resulting delays in delivery.

Yes a balance has to be taken , but in my view there appears (from the outside), to be an appetite to sit back and do nothing.

I will reiterate Manchester, should as others have done be actively encouraging such flights and making sure they play as active a part as is possible not looking at a spreadsheet about " maximising revenue " at other group airports or worse shrugging shoulders and putting the closed sign up..

The number of flights handled by Manchester in respect of PPE is derisory compared to its status as the largest airport outside London and before the crisis one of the largest in Europe.

Gtr Manchester taxpayers are subsidising the airport to the tune of £250m, quite right, over the years they have benefited enormously from millions in dividends, but Manchester should still be maximising EVERY opportunity in every way possible to generate revenue, and might I add, assist its citizens in the broader effort of providing logistical healthcare support.

Instead of leading from the front MANCHESTER appears to be giving the impression they can't be bothered.

[inOban]

Does MAN have the on-site warehousing to let it become a logistics hub?

[Navpi]

Does MAN have the on-site warehousing to let it become a logistics hub?

Probably Yes...

[spannersatcx]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manchester should still be maximising EVERY opportunity in every way possible to generate revenue,

.
Well it is putting up the office rent! even though most of them are empty at the moment as airline staff are mostly furloughed and sat at home. :ugh:

[750XL]

Why not send them to CWL/BOH/STN/BHX or wherever else that may be.

5 hours by road for the last leg of the cargo's journey is insignificant, it makes barely any difference whether it's offloaded at MAN or CWL. It'll probably still get to the hospital in the same amount of time.

[MAN777]

Yes MAG bean counters have probably done their sums and come up with “its not worth it” answer.

Income from a freight movement I would say is less than that of a PAX aircraft, you have the movement fee and a percentage of concessionaires income such as fuel. There would be no income from PAX handling, car parking, shop and food sales etc.

Chaps is much more qualified on the subject and Im sure he could clarify my points.

I am a huge supporter of MAN and would love to see the lines of 747 freighters once again but while the group has 2 of the largest freight hub airports on its accounts sheet why bother ?

[pwalhx]

I can confirm after 40 years working in or associated with the freight business I have never had a single complaint from cargo about which airport it landed at.

[OzzyOzBorn]

but while the group has 2 of the largest freight hub airports on its accounts sheet why bother ?

Because those two airports serve different regions of the UK.

[750XL]

Because those two airports serve different regions of the UK.

Cargo doesn't care where it's delivered to. A few hours by road at the end of a week long journey from China doesn't make a difference.

You've only got to post something by UK > UK next day delivery using a courier service such as Hermes etc to see the bizarre routes parcels take, to get from say, Liverpool to Manchester.

Liverpool > East Midlands parcel depot > Manchester

[MAN777]

Freight unlike PAX doesn't really care where it flies from, long road journeys at the beginning and end of a cargo flight is completely normal, thats why hundreds of wagons leave consolidation warehouses all over the North every week and head for East Midlands, Stansted, Heathrow, Amsterdam, Leige and countless other air freight hubs. It is no longer Manchester's business model to handle dedicated freighters.
It will be interesting to see what happens to the UK - China airbridge flights once we no longer need vast quantities of PPE and the growing trend of not buying Chinese goods kicks in

WOW 750XL exact same time post and content, are we twins ?

[SCFC1EP]

WOW750XL/MAN777 Spot on

You have the largest cargo dedicated airport in the UK just 2 hours down the road, with all the extra staff and equipment needed, and being used all the time every day add extra 6 flights a day would not be a problem this is what its been developed on and recently more cargo space been provided over the last 3-4 years the size the area has increased to is huge, if 6 extra cargo flights attempted to get in MAN in a week they would struggle.,
Probably get the cargo off the plane quicker at EMA process it through the system load onto truck drive to it's destination in North west quicker than doing the same at MAN why? they got bigger manpower/equipment and distribution.
Why invest at MAN with cargo operations when all the money is being spent on Terminals
Manchester is not turning business away they;re just redirecting it to there dedicated Cargo airports the money still goes into the big pot covering MAN/EMA/STN

[GEB74]

What a weird rant about freight.........
Freight doesn't care where it lands. A 5-6 hour end truck journey is inconsequential to 95+% of all air freight.
MAG has cargo specialist airports - one being 3 hours from Manchester by truck.
MAN has not been a cargo focused airport for years and is not currently geared up for rapid changes to that reality in either trained manpower or necessary equipment.
None of this is news...........

I brought a consignment of PPE in from China for my business via airfreight last week.
The kit was made in Shandong province, for some reason it flew out of Mainland China via Hong Kong 1000+ miles away and ended up at EMA. Couldn't care less why. It turned up on time.......

[Navpi]

If you reread the premise of the original statement you would be clear that it is not a rant but a considered judgement of the opportunities potentially being missed in what is a much changed landscape.

Might i also point out it is somewhat disingenuous to suggest there is no money in freight if an aircraft applies to use Manchester, but then amplify the reasons why it should be redirected to EMA where incredibly it becomes beneficial creating both "revenue" and indeed jobs.

You cannot have it both ways ?

I have no objection to EMA being the principal parcel hub within MAG I do however object to enquiries for general cargo (and indeed PPE) from airlines to use Manchester, being artificially redirected to other airports due to a clear lack of the imaginative and creative thinking that was once so prevalent.

[Mr A Tis]

I have no objection to EMA being the principal parcel hub within MAG I do however object to enquiries for general cargo (and indeed PPE) from airlines to use Manchester, being artificially redirected to other airports due to a clear lack of the imaginative and creative thinking that was once so prevalent.

Navpi / Bagso. It is a bit of a rant. I don't think it's up to you to decide if EMA should be just a parcel hub or not. As you know, imagination /creative thinking at MAN ended after Gil Thomson. Since those days, the airport has not been responsive to passengers - customers - users, but to shareholders first and foremost. We see this from their public grandstanding on public transport but in reality encouraging raking it in on car park & drop off fees. Engineering security queues in order to flog fast tracks- that often weren't. We also see this now, when airlines are on their backsides- MAN are introducing increases to their office rents. So, Navpi, I wouldn't bother trying to suggest anything- MAN is a closed book these days let them get on with it.

[commit aviation]

Navpi

The logistics around moving freight have been covered by others already but I wanted to pick up on a couple of other statements

Dressing this up as a finance issue is absolutely ludicrous.

How so? Are you are advocating that MAG accommodate this as some kind of goodwill gesture whether there is money in it or not? (Maybe not an inappropriate sentiment in these times and potentially good PR.) Otherwise, I know these are not normal times but MAG surely needs to turn a profit?

In fact, later you state

Gtr Manchester taxpayers are subsidising the airport to the tune of £250m, quite right, over the years they have benefited enormously from millions in dividends

Which suggests that MAG must be doing something right if the Manchester taxpayers see a return from their investment in normal circumstances. Surely now, you would expect the board to make the best return on the councils / taxpayers £250m? If handling freight through MAN is not the best return on that investment, why do it? As stated, you can’t have it both ways.
From what I can see, aviation right now is not making money – it is doing its utmost to minimise the losses and I imagine MAG is in the same position. In my mind that feels more like striking the right balance and not an excuse.

[UnderASouthernSky]

Navpi

The logistics around moving freight have been covered by others already but I wanted to pick up on a couple of other statements

Dressing this up as a finance issue is absolutely ludicrous.

How so? Are you are advocating that MAG accommodate this as some kind of goodwill gesture whether there is money in it or not? (Maybe not an inappropriate sentiment in these times and potentially good PR.) Otherwise, I know these are not normal times but MAG surely needs to turn a profit?

In fact, later you state

Gtr Manchester taxpayers are subsidising the airport to the tune of £250m, quite right, over the years they have benefited enormously from millions in dividends

Which suggests that MAG must be doing something right if the Manchester taxpayers see a return from their investment in normal circumstances. Surely now, you would expect the board to make the best return on the councils / taxpayers £250m? If handling freight through MAN is not the best return on that investment, why do it? As stated, you can’t have it both ways.
From what I can see, aviation right now is not making money – it is doing its utmost to minimise the losses and I imagine MAG is in the same position. In my mind that feels more like striking the right balance and not an excuse.

How do you know that the freight company involved doesn't want to use an airport other than MAN. It may get better cargo (not airport) charges from other handling agents at other airports such as EMA, CWL, BHX. It may be the NHS themselves that selected these airports from a list that included MAN.

How much revenue do you think MAN would receive from, say 1 wide body flight a day on a quick turn? Is it feasible that contracts with partners such as NATS could have been temporarily renegotiated and it would cost MAN more than this charter revenue if they went beyond X additional movements or they arrive out of specified hours?

[Travel Agent]

Just had a notification from one of our suppliers advising that United have pulled Newark for the "foreseeable future".

[OltonPete]

Just had a notification from one of our suppliers advising that United have pulled Newark for the "foreseeable future".

Certainly not bookable but EDI-EWR is, which is ominous.

Pete

[ATNotts]

Certainly not bookable but EDI-EWR is, which is ominous.

Pete

With Covid-19 cases on the rise in many US states, in all probability as a direct result of Trump's daft policies, and those of state governors who support Trump, travel between the US and UK isn't likely to gain much traction for a few months yet. If the UK were to implement an "air bridge" with the USA at this stage it would be rank stupidity, and show that politics was the priority, not public health. In this situation it's frankly surprising that any US routes from the UK regions are slated to operate.

[chaps1954]

Not suprised as things are a bit dodgy in US at present, I wouldn`t go for sure for several reasons ( 3 off top of head) and wouldn`t want them over here either

[Scottie Dog]

Can I mention 2 points with regards to the United service Manchester/Newark.

Firstly the latest ACL report for Winter 20 still shows the airline as holding slots for a daily service. There is no mention of United in the comments section, however this is because there is no change from the details for W19.

Secondly a reliable source has advised that United are still finalising their plans for the winter. Let's leave the guessing until the truth is known.

[zfw]

T3 Opening 1st July

[TURIN]

Vuelling and Turkish returning, Lufthansa increasing, including a FRA nightstop. BA to increase to two per day. Qatar double daily also.

[The96er]

Vuelling and Turkish returning, Lufthansa increasing, including a FRA nightstop. BA to increase to two per day. Qatar double daily also.

VY not back until th 14th Jul and BA scaled back slightly - x2 daily now not until 16th Jul I believe. I2 still down for an Aug return despite what is written elswere.

[TURIN]

Not quite sure what you mean by BA scaling back, I thought they were only at 6/week at the moment. Is I2 iberia Express?

[The96er]

Not quite sure what you mean by BA scaling back, I thought they were only at 6/week at the moment. Is I2 iberia Express?

Yes, I2 is Iberia Express. BA were planned to do x2/daily for the whole of Jul, but have informed Menzies that it will be x3/weekly, however, their schedule at the moment is showing 1st/3rd/4th/6th / daily 8th-15th and the x2 daily thereafter.

[bar none]

Sunday 19 July Manchester Dublin dep 1720 arr 1830 by the unmentionable Middle East airline but operated by Stobart Air only £1905 single.Bargain!

[Stockportcounty]

Just out of interest, does anyone know when T2/T3 are likely to open again?

T3. Aug 1st.

[Albert Hall]

Why would the Enterprise of Tetchy Inclination Headquartered in Abu Dhabi be selling Manchester-Dublin flights on Stobart Air?

[MANFAN]

zfw T3 is back open on 1st August.
Mister Geezer T2 hopefully won’t be far behind...flights increasing all the time during July and august. I’m predicting T2 will have to open during this time especially if TUI & Jet2 start flying from 15th July as planned...

[Scottie Dog]

zfw T3 is back open on 1st August.
Mister Geezer T2 hopefully won’t be far behind...flights increasing all the time during July and august. I’m predicting T2 will have to open during this time especially if TUI & Jet2 start flying from 15th July as planned...
Glad to hear that @MANFAN and hopefully things will start to return to "normal" later in the year.
Any news on when T2X will come into use?

[Rutan16]

Albert Hall -Consolidator offer on seats probably normally open in the codeshares and onward connections at either end .

They have no intention to sell at the price indeed at all however their codeshare arrangement will insist on capacity limits and availability.

Some of the codeshare rules can be quite esoteric at times !

You could look at some of the Flybe/Air France fares once offered via Roissy and onto Central Europe - £600 -£800 fares were not uncommon on the Flybe pages yet half that on Air France.

[zfw]

zfw T3 is back open on 1st August.
Mister Geezer T2 hopefully won’t be far behind...flights increasing all the time during July and august. I’m predicting T2 will have to open during this time especially if TUI & Jet2 start flying from 15th July as planned...

Err no its open 1st July.
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/848x993/t3_88ae5cf807ebf2f5581e537c6abc4879b1f9a3f1.jpg

[MANFAN]

zfw yes, apologies. I was given incorrect information.
Thanks for the confirmation.

[MANFAN]

Glad to hear that @MANFAN and hopefully things will start to return to "normal" later in the year.
Any news on when T2X will come into use?

Not sure yet...I have mid August-September in my head for some reason...maybe wishful thinking...

[JerseyAero]

[QUOTE=commit aviation;10804061]Once again the topic of freight rears it's head!

MAN actually had a visit from a B747F this morning - TF-AMP divert from DSA due to low visibility. Somewhat surprisingly it was accepted and refuelled before returning to DSA.

[Una Due Tfc]

With Covid-19 cases on the rise in many US states, in all probability as a direct result of Trump's daft policies, and those of state governors who support Trump, travel between the US and UK isn't likely to gain much traction for a few months yet. If the UK were to implement an "air bridge" with the USA at this stage it would be rank stupidity, and show that politics was the priority, not public health. In this situation it's frankly surprising that any US routes from the UK regions are slated to operate.

Uhm, not to be rude, but the UK made as big a mess of it as the US, they have as much reason to fear you as you have to fear them in this regard!

[chaps1954]

You are not being rude but I know which country I would prefer and it aint US as US is going to have mass deaths again and we don`t have Trump who is a loose cannon

[Una Due Tfc]

You are not being rude but I know which country I would prefer and it aint US as US is going to have mass deaths again and we don`t have Trump who is a loose cannon

Fair point. I suppose in the UK one wouldn't need to remortgage in order to pay one's hospital bills in the even treatment was required either, seeing as travel insurance won't cover COVID related expenses now.

[chaps1954]

Read the other day someone got a bill of 1.2M $ for Covis treatment

[Una Due Tfc]

Make that 4 mortgages so.....

[GrahamK]

Apparently confirmed that UA MAN-EWR permanently dropped

[hammerb32]

Apparently confirmed that UA MAN-EWR permanently dropped

I'm hopeful that when UA say permanent they're referring to winter 20/21 and will re-evaluate for summer 2021, would be astonishing if they see no market at all in the UK outside of London.

[GrahamK]

I'm hopeful that when UA say permanent they're referring to winter 20/21 and will re-evaluate for summer 2021, would be astonishing if they see no market at all in the UK outside of London.
EDI and GLA available for S21. EDI available for W20

[Plane mad 134]

EDI and GLA available for S21. EDI available for W20
Hearing reports GLA will be cancelled permanently too. EDI is apparently under review.

[MANFOD]

Hearing reports GLA will be cancelled permanently too. EDI is apparently under review.
Have to say I would be amazed if they were only flying to Heathrow in England but to 2 airports in Scotland 35 miles apart.
Are Delta and American planned to fly to either or both Scottish airports in S21?
MAN needs VS to survive more than ever.

[Stockportcounty]

QUOTE=GrahamK;10815638]Apparently confirmed that UA MAN-EWR permanently dropped[/QUOTE

Yes unfortunately.

Given the bloody thing is packed to the rafters with Royal Mail and more than few punters every day.
After 25yrs it would be a sad loss for ECGG. Things are very fluid at the mo, here’s hoping it’s not the last of the Golden globe flights.

[Plane mad 134]

Have to say I would be amazed if they were only flying to Heathrow in England but to 2 airports in Scotland 35 miles apart.
Are Delta and American planned to fly to either or both Scottish airports in S21?
MAN needs VS to survive more than ever.
Delta is still planning to fly JFK-EDI/GLA both 1x daily on 757, and also BOS-EDI 1x daily B757. American plan PHL-EDI 1x daily B787-8.

But United would still be a sore loss with 4x daily 757s to Scotland. I hope they come back to MAN too, they were apparently doing well here.

[awwdabaaby]

Delta is still planning to fly JFK-EDI/GLA both 1x daily on 757, and also BOS-EDI 1x daily B757. American plan PHL-EDI 1x daily B787-8.

But United would still be a sore loss with 4x daily 757s to Scotland. I hope they come back to MAN too, they were apparently doing well here.

GLA-EWR is NOT getting cancelled, ORD and IAD are gone from EDI

[CraigJay]

GLA-EWR is NOT getting cancelled, ORD and IAD are gone from EDI
ORD and IAD are only cancelled this summer, there’s nothing to say they won’t return next year.

[Speedbird538]

l was speaking to our sales agent from United (l work for a UK based tour operator who use United from both LHR and MAN) and he said that the word from HQ in the states
is that United is going to pull out of all provinces and just concentrate on LHR flights. Hope he is wrong.

[OzzyOzBorn]

United Airlines is in a difficult place financially. It is reported that they will try to get a $5Bn bond issue away next week. Goldman Sachs is on the case according to Bloomberg. Solvency cannot be taken for granted.

Boeing's CEO was recently rapped for suggesting that he expected one of the major US carriers to fail due to the C-19 crisis. Perhaps the anger directed towards him was more a case of "not in front of the children" rather than his authoritative opinion being wide of the mark in reality.

We'll have to see how things pan out. Feeling within the US is that passengers will drive rather than fly on journeys conducive to that until a vaccination programme has been completed. And stubbornly high C-19 infections in key areas such as Florida and New York could amount to a 'lost summer' for vacation travel. The market outlook for US carriers is tough. Unless they're deemed too big to fail by government.

On the plus-side, fuel prices appear set to remain relatively low in the medium term. That helps.

[chinapattern]

Rumour has it neither Cathay or Hainan (in pax form) will be back either.

[Navpi]

The way things are going you do wonder if CX and HU will even exist.

[Mr A Tis]

According to Simple Flying - Air Transat to resume operations from July 23rd.
For passengers flying from Montreal where the carrier is based, the available destinations will be; Athens in Greece and the French cities of Bordeaux, Lyon, Nantes, Marseille, Paris, and Toulouse, and a flight to Lisbon. From Toronto, there will be flights to Athens, Glasgow, London (https://simpleflying.com/air-transat-london-gatwick-frenquency/), Manchester, Porto, and Rome.

Passengers will also receive a small care kit on board. This will contain disinfectant, gloves, face masks, and hand sanitizer.

Anyone know if the Air Canada merger is a dead duck or not? Don't think Rouge has been doing much flying, if any.

[chinapattern]

All up in the air at the moment but Rouge have withdrawn the 767s thus effectively ending all transatlantic operations.

[spannersatcx]

Rumour has it neither Cathay or Hainan (in pax form) will be back either.
what rumours are these and where are they from, as someone with a vested interest?

[spannersatcx]

The way things are going you do wonder if CX and HU will even exist.
well CX has just received US$5B which, at todays costs, should last 12 months at least?

[zfw]

Rumour has it neither Cathay or Hainan (in pax form) will be back either.Emirates continue two per week to 12Jul, 15-31Jul is four per week all B777-300 at lunchtime.

Qatar a/w currently operates daily at lunchtime but increases to x11pw from 02Jul with morning flight added.

Etihad restarts 01Jul with retimed service once per day 1040/1225z B787-10 during July.

Cathay cutback to 01Aug, Singapore to 17Jul, Turkish to 01Jul, Oman to 01Jul, Air Transat 26Jul, Biman 16Jul, Ethiopian 02Jul, Saudia 01Jul.



Hainan adhoc charters 20Jun, 10Jul and 25Jul with A330-300.

[VickersVicount]

All up in the air at the moment.
Just the other day was reported as going ahead and plan for conclusion by W20. I expect this to go through. Think AC have the routes already planned for the A321LRs!

[Una Due Tfc]

Delta are the only US major who so far have not retired the 757. As such UA and AA will be significantly reducing routes to non hub / primary airports one would imagine. AA are also retiring the 767 and A330. Until both start getting A321XLRs in 2023, things could be tough. UA have pulled EWR-SNN, SFO and EWR to DUB appear to be continuing on the 787, they ran ORD and IAD to DUB on the 757, haven't read what is likely to happen there so far, but their 767s are very premium heavy and are pretty much set up for LHR and other premium hubs, so probably not suitable for the likes of DUB/SNN/MAN/EDI/GLA. With business travel likely in the doldrums for quite a while, who knows whether that fleet will survive.

AA are taking delivery of several 787-8s right now, but I'd be wary of making any assumptions about them, rumours are rife that they'll be into chapter 11 once the CARES act expires on 1st October.

Very tough times ahead. The recession/depression resulting from the virus hasn't really bitten yet because everything is effectively in stasis due lockdowns.

[BHX5DME]

Pax

Stansted – 20,607 down 99.2%

Manchester – 18,750 down 99.3%

East Mids – zero

Cargo

East Mids – 30,547 down 0.7%

Stansted – 21,210 up 14.1%

Manchester 1,342 down 85.9%

Traffic figures at all MAG airports were severely impacted by the outbreak of Covid-19 in May, as travel restrictions and a dramatic reduction in demand for flights impacted the Group’s passenger numbers. MAG’s reduction was reflective of world trends, with global travel demand reduced by 97% compared to previous year, according to UK Government data.

All MAG airports saw passenger figures reduce by at least 99.3% year-on-year in May, with MAG’s three airports serving 39,357 passengers between them, compared with 5.7 million last May.

At London Stansted Airport and East Midlands Airports, cargo figures held up well (STN: +14.1%, EMA: -0.7%) as key freight operators used the airports to keep essential goods flowing into the country and providing UK firms with a key route to export.

East Midlands Airport was one of the most resilient European airports by flight numbers in May, as its important role as the UK’s biggest airport for cargo aircraft continued.

[OzzyOzBorn]

Freight down 85.9%. Ye Gawds! People have been quarantined in place. Pallets haven't!

What isn't expressly stated is that MAN's cargo figures represent abject disaster. The decade-long policy of switch-selling freight-leads away from MAN is clearly exposed as the shameful failure which some on here have been scolded for calling it out to be. Absence of dedicated freighter services help protect long-haul passenger flights ... yes, that argument went well. Freighters occupy valuable aircraft stands ... yes, that's what aircraft stands are there for. EMA is just down the road ... yes, that road which is recognised as the worst in Europe linking two major conurbations. And MAN has ten newly-constructed stands ready to bring on stream at a time when demand from passenger fleets is in freefall.

Time for a complete change of direction. Time to enthusiastically welcome freighters back to the fold at MAN. Not just by resignedly acceding to inspiring initiative from enterprising growth companies such as THG (who refuse to be switch-sold elsewhere?). But by actively marketing to and incentivising operators whose services will benefit business in the NW region and beyond. MAG is arguably one of the biggest winners from the 'Northern Powerhouse' agenda, but that comes with a moral responsibility to invest in its success too. Maximising freight potential is low-hanging fruit in this respect.

A good start would be to ensure that they guy who answers the phone to Manchester Airport cargo inquiries isn't incentivised to switch-sell the business to EMA or STN. That has to stop. In the difficult economic environment we face now, the onus must fall upon MAN to move away from the frequently encountered: "NO - Now what is the question?" mindset to: "YES WE CAN!!!!!" (Apologies to Bob the Builder and Mr Obama).

No doubt a series of postings will now ensue insisting that MAN is absolutely correct to turn business away. That shows sophisticated group strategic thinking, you see. Well, we're in an economic recession for the ages now. Or is it a DEpression? Time to leave that particular business-school garbage behind till the next economic boom once again allows the luxury of such a damaging policy. Get out and compete for business again. Make sure that MAN offers robust capability to support the needs of northern business across the spectrum of aviation services ... including cargo. HMG wants to 'level up' the North. Come on MAN ... get on the case and help to make it happen!

[brian_dromey]

Freight down 85.9%. Ye Gawds! People have been quarantined in place. Pallets haven't!

Clearly the majority of MAN's cargo business in below the feet of passengers. It is that combination of passenger and cargo demand that makes the flights viable. Obviously when passengers are prevented from travelling, that makes life difficult for airlines who dedicate the majority of their floor space to passenger carriage. We have seen airlines remove seats from the passenger cabin to transport PPE, etc. But this is fairly inefficient overall. I really done understand why MAN 'should' cater for this traffic when they were bursting at the seams? In the last 6 months the aviation business has changed beyond recognition - it seems reasonable to allow airport and airlines time to readjust their operations. Dedicated cargo facilities might play a larger component of the airports business in the medium term, but they have already made significant investments in dedicated freighter facilities elsewhere in the group, why change course now? It is worth bearing in mind that MAG is just one aspect, the freight integrators forwarders, warehousing and distribution networks also play a part. Why would someone open a new facility when they have a perfectly functional one 60 miles away they could use more intensively?

[FFHKG]

Routes are today reporting a weekly flight to Tehran operating by Iranair starting in July.

[OzzyOzBorn]

Clearly the majority of MAN's cargo business in below the feet of passengers.

That is self-evident. But it wasn't always so.

It is that combination of passenger and cargo demand that makes the flights viable.

My point is that the policy prioritising mixed-use flights exclusively at the expense of pure cargo ops has been exposed as a disaster. A business failure of epic proportions. DOWN 85.9% in the midst of a global air cargo boom. Some disgraced cargo strategist needs to acknowledge the reality of this abject failure and step aside from the wasteland they leave behind. Time for new talent in marketing cargo at MAN. Yes, cargo is a factor in the viability of scheduled passenger services. But not sufficiently to justify the exclusion of all competing business as a matter of airport policy. Airports should be a broad church welcoming all business leads and let the market sort the winners from the losers. Playing God has never worked out well for MAN. Remember protecting BA by turning away EasyJet and Ryanair back in the day? Did keeping freighters out deliver retention of Thomas Cook long-haul, Jet Airways, United Airlines, Air Canada Rouge, (some) Virgin Atlantic routes, American JFK, and very likely other long-haul services which haven't yet been confirmed? MAN needs to encourage ALL business opportunities, including servicing cargo intended for businesses in the conurbations of NW England and North Wales.

It is a myth that all-cargo services and long-haul passenger services cannot successfully co-exist. See Milano Malpensa. And they have a big cargo specialist airport 76km away at Bergamo too. I deliberately chose a broadly comparable airport vis-a-vis MAN rather than the likes of AMS which is huge in all-cargo and scheduled passenger services alike. Only Manchester seems to preach the myth that the two must be segregated at all costs. Everyone else is getting it wrong. And the results prove it. Oh ... hang on a sec ...

they have already made significant investments in dedicated freighter facilities elsewhere in the group, why change course now?

Because MAG's airports are not interchangeable. Each offers a unique business proposition based upon its geography. Stansted best serves the South-East. East Midlands best serves ... err, the East Midlands and the M1 corridor.

Why would someone open a new facility when they have a perfectly functional one 60 miles away they could use more intensively?

Rather, you should ask why did they wilfully run down the perfectly good cargo operation which thrived at MAN as recently as 2008. There are people who leave behind a rich legacy in business. And there are others who leave disaster like this in their wake. Business mistakes need to be acknowledged with honesty and transparency. Then corrected. Defending failed strategy with religious zeal until your market share is decimated generally doesn't work out well from a business perspective.

You say you are in Cork / Leeds. How often do you drive an artic over the Snake Pass? There is sixty miles. And there is sixty miles. EMA is a very challenging 60 miles for a heavily-laden HGV. That Pennine road tunnel towards Sheffield can't come soon enough - but that's another discussion.

[inOban]

EMA isn't just the cargo airport for the East Midlands. It's the airport for the major logistic bases which serve the whole of the UK. From these sites an LGV can reach more of England in an out and back shift than anywhere like Manchester. The specialist freight airlines use EMA because they want to.
​​​

[SWBKCB]

You say you are in Cork / Leeds. How often do you drive an artic over the Snake Pass? There is sixty miles. And there is sixty miles. EMA is a very challenging 60 miles for a heavily-laden HGV. That Pennine road tunnel towards Sheffield can't come soon enough - but that's another discussion.

Snake Pass? In an artic from EMA to Manchester?

[750XL]

EMA is a very challenging 60 miles for a heavily-laden HGV

Very challenging? For whom? It's a 2 hour drive :*

If any HGV driver struggles with that they'd best find another career :O

[ATNotts]

Snake Pass? In an artic from EMA to Manchester?

A42/M42M6/M56 or A50/A38/M6 Toll/M6/M56 Easy peasy lemon squeezy! (Especially at the dead of night).

[Curious Pax]

A42/M42M6/M56 or A50/A38/M6 Toll/M6/M56 Easy peasy lemon squeezy! (Especially at the dead of night).

Easier than that - done it many times. Straight up the A50 from East Mids to junction 16 on the M6, then off at 19, up the A556 link road (the new Road is so much better than the old one) onto the M56 and job’s good ‘un! 80 miles on good standard dual carriageway and motorway the whole way. In normal times the rush hour on the M6 will slow things down, but at the moment even an artic would struggle to take much more than 90 minutes.

[brian_dromey]

Because MAG's airports are not interchangeable. Each offers a unique business proposition based upon its geography. Stansted best serves the South-East. East Midlands best serves ... err, the East Midlands and the M1 corridor.

Rather, you should ask why did they wilfully run down the perfectly good cargo operation which thrived at MAN as recently as 2008. There are people who leave behind a rich legacy in business. And there are others who leave disaster like this in their wake. Business mistakes need to be acknowledged with honesty and transparency. Then corrected. Defending failed strategy with religious zeal until your market share is decimated generally doesn't work out well from a business perspective.

We are clearly looking at this from a different perspective. I appreciate that cargo provides variety on the airfield at all hours of the day and night and that in the past there was a lot of dedicated cargo traffic. But you are revising history. Prior to COVID-19 dedicated fright was in decline, as were yields. Dedicated freighters were being retired because the modern wide-bodied aircraft like the 77W and A350, even the 787 have huge cargo ability, even with heavy passenger loads, the ME3 have flooded the market. MAN's cargo figures support that.

You mention 2008, MAN handled 141,000 tonnes. In 2018 Man handled was 114,000 tonnes, roughly 20% decrease, hardly a collapse and a good performance when looking at tother UK airports.
https://www.airportwatch.org.uk/air-freight/
LHR, EMA and STN have seen increases of between 15 and 20% in that decade and MAG has a net growth of 73 tonnes. What I am saying is that the cargo market has fundamentally changed, rather than mismanagement MAN have actually grown their business, albeit via different airports which have a better geographical location to feed to/from the ground-based logistics infrastructure.

I agree that cargo volume has collapsed and MAN could probably have taken more cargo. No doubt it would have done if EMA and STN had been overrun, but the air fright industry did the logical thing - they added capacity to ports they already serve. Look at it another way. Why do TK fly multiple times a day from and not add an LPL and an LBA instead?

[750XL]

Over the past few summers there's been virtually no spare capacity for aircraft parking, especially during the night/early hours when all the TCX, TOM, LS, EZY, FR etc were back home before the first wave. Pissing off the majority of your airport users to accommodate a 3x weekly 744F freighter (which barely brings any revenue into the airport compared to passengers) doesn't make business sense. They're more hassle than they're worth at an airport that's already filled to the brim.

[Curious Pax]

Rather, you should ask why did they wilfully run down the perfectly good cargo operation which thrived at MAN as recently as 2008. There are people who leave behind a rich legacy in business. And there are others who leave disaster like this in their wake. Business mistakes need to be acknowledged with honesty and transparency. Then corrected. Defending failed strategy with religious zeal until your market share is decimated generally doesn't work out well from a business perspective.


I think you need to look a little closer at how cargo only operations have changed over the last 10-20 years. Of those that used MAN - China Airlines have reduced from 21 to 18 744Fs; Lufthansa are in the final stages of removing their MD11 fleet, with the number of 777Fs replacing them far fewer, Cathay’s freight only operation (which now also incorporates Air Hong Kong) disappeared as part of their wider consolidation, but that has been replaced by the (probably greater) under floor space on the daily pax flights. Great Wall folded, as did the Singapore-based outfit whose names escapes me. Of course others have been and gone for different reasons over the years, but it’s the air freight business that has changed in the main, and not much to do with MAN discouraging anything.

Maybe the extra Chinese flights over the next few weeks will calm you a little!

[OzzyOzBorn]

Glad we have once again established - so quickly - that MAG has handled the cargo business at MAN so impeccably, even though throughput is sharply below that of 2008. Twelve years on. Awesome performance guys.

Manchester's freight strategy is perfection. I concede. It is every other airport that has it wrong. They're just so stupid.

Malpensa? Schiphol? You fools!!! You've got it all wrong.

Listen to those freight industry titans shaping Manchester Airport's cargo strategy. They're the bee's knees, and no argument! No improvement required. -85.9% in a boom period for cargo is just fine. Break out the bubbly.

[750XL]

Schiphol? You fools!!! You've got it all wrong..

Apples and oranges.

You can't possibly be seriously suggesting AMS's importance as a cargo hub is in any way, shape or form, relatable to MAN?

The Netherlands flower industry for starters...!

[commit aviation]

....& in non-cargo related news:

https://www.travelweekly.co.uk/articles/376036/virgin-atlantic-announces-restart-to-17-destinations

Virgin looking to restart Orlando from August 24th with Manchester Barbados from October.
No specified dates for other routes beyond looking to resume in September and October.
(Usual statements about dependence on quarantine and other countries opening up)

[Suzeman]

Ah Mr Oz Born

How nice of you to be so concerned about cargo at MAN from so far away. This subject seems to flare up from time to time just like a certain virus undoubtedly will, so thank you for raising it yet again

The freight through-puts posted for MAN are for flown freight only; I'm sure you know that . And of course with your excellent knowledge of the industry and truck routes, you must know that the volume of freight actually passing through the World Freight Terminal sheds and being dealt with by the forwarding community has always been significantly higher than the flown freight figure. But that doesn't suit your narrative does it?

In the mid 2000s when flown cargo was at its peak, a survey estimated that there was at least 50% more freight being processed in the sheds than the total being flown in/out of MAN because of consolidations and trucking. If such a survey was carried out today under pre-coronavirus conditions, I have no idea what the figure would be but I would guess it would be the same or even higher nowadays .

So where does MAN generate all it's cargo income from?. There would be runway and ATC charges for all freighters, but as most cargo comes in the belly of pax aircraft, there is not a lot of revenue coming in this way and any sum would be a very small proportion of the overall. There is no throughput charge for freight and handling fees will go to the handling agents. The main source of cargo -related revenue will be via rents etc of the cargo buildings on the airport site.

So rather than having a rant about throughput, why not ask questions about whether the freight community in Manchester feel short changed by the facilities and services on offer bearing in mind the way the global business now operates?. Can they sustain their business and protect and offer jobs? What are the spin offs that having these businesses at MAN bring?

I perceive that your rant (and those of others on this subject) is really about being upset at not being able to willy-wave anymore. We were all used to Manchester producing top line figures and lots of different cargo tails when it was a single entity. It was certainly a source of local pride. Now it is part of a group and the global business has changed. But has that affected the viability of the freight forwarders and transit sheds businesses at the Airport? Has it affected the region in it's ability to import and export goods?

I don't know the answer and I suspect you don't either. We can all speculate, but I know there are some in the cargo industry at MAN on this board and maybe they can share their views.

[matjr79]

I think you need to look a little closer at how cargo only operations have changed over the last 10-20 years. Of those that used MAN - China Airlines have reduced from 21 to 18 744Fs; Lufthansa are in the final stages of removing their MD11 fleet, with the number of 777Fs replacing them far fewer, Cathay’s freight only operation (which now also incorporates Air Hong Kong) disappeared as part of their wider consolidation, but that has been replaced by the (probably greater) under floor space on the daily pax flights. Great Wall folded, as did the Singapore-based outfit whose names escapes me. Of course others have been and gone for different reasons over the years, but it’s the air freight business that has changed in the main, and not much to do with MAN discouraging anything.

Maybe the extra Chinese flights over the next few weeks will calm you a little!

It was Jett8 - I used to do the weight and balance for it along with Dragonair, China Airlines, Air China, Great Wall.
We used to have around 10-15 74F a week back then - glorious period for MAN freight figures.

Matjr79

[OzzyOzBorn]

You can't possibly be seriously suggesting AMS's importance as a cargo hub is in any way, shape or form, relatable to MAN?

No. And I didn't suggest that. Neither for tulips from Amsterdam nor for luxury sports cars from Malpensa. The product profile differs from one region to another. But the point I did make was that all-cargo flights and passenger schedules with underfloor space can co-exist quite successfully at the same airport. A matter about which certain entities at MAN are in constant denial.

Though, since you mention it, the 17.4 million population of the Netherlands is slightly below that claimed as falling within MAN's catchment area. So there is room for at least a little ambition. Decent industrial base to go at too.

How nice of you to be so concerned about cargo at MAN from so far away.

But very close to the home of one of MAG's largest shareholders! Though I think SYD has the edge over MEL myself! :-)

But that doesn't suit your narrative does it?

The narrative of being a perpetual apologist for the negativity, failure and lack of ambition which typifies MAN's attitude to cargo business doesn't sit well with me. You're quite right, mate. Business leaders in competing regions must be euphoric.

I perceive that your rant (and those of others on this subject) is really about being upset at not being able to willy-wave anymore.

Rant. Defined as any point of view which you don't agree with? OK. The willy-wave reference is intriguing. So many on here seem to imply extensive experience of this. I feel I must have missed out on a whole dimension of life. We're a bit sheltered in the outback. Well, till we step out into the sunshine. Then it isn't very sheltered at all. But I digress.

There would be runway and ATC charges for all freighters, but as most cargo comes in the belly of pax aircraft, there is not a lot of revenue coming in this way and any sum would be a very small proportion of the overall. There is no throughput charge for freight and handling fees will go to the handling agents. The main source of cargo -related revenue will be via rents etc of the cargo buildings on the airport site.

Well, absolutely. Competing for business of this sort is just so tiresome. Why bother? These are the scraps we grandees can leave for the hoi-polloi. Can't have B747-8F's occupying stands at MAN ... stands constructed to handle real planes. Important ones! And the only metric worthy of consideration is the flow of cash into MAG's own coffers. Never mind all the other employers on site. And jobs in the NW. And as for supporting the Northern Powerhouse Partnership by developing MAN to its full potential ... yeah, lip-service to that is quite sufficient. Let no feathers be ruffled in the towering spires of MAG Cargo. The strategy is beyond reproach. Manchester has got it right again and every other airport's business practices are a bunch of dingo droppings. -85.9% is a great result. Hold those heads up high.

[Suzeman]

Oh dear - another posting which doesn't answer the question.

I'm not suggesting that all is sweetness and light, but to support your position, please present us with

The evidence that the people who work in the air cargo business are not generally satisfied with the number of services and the facilities at MAN.
That the shareholders are not happy with this aspect of MAN's performance within the group.
And that the regional development authorities see the current flown cargo throughput and lack of all freight services as being a drag on the regional economy

Then your arguments may gain some credibility

[OzzyOzBorn]

Please present us with the evidence that the people who work in the air cargo business are not satisfied with the number of services and the facilities at MAN.

And that the shareholders are not satisfied with this aspect of MAN's performance within the group.

Please present evidence that they wouldn't be delighted with something much better. And I'm sure the shareholders will be deeply impressed by -85.9% in the midst of a boom in cargo. Way to go! Nothing to see here.

[Suzeman]

Please present evidence that they wouldn't be delighted with something much better. And I'm sure the shareholders will be deeply impressed by -85.9% in the midst of a boom in cargo. Way to go! Nothing to see here.

I have already said that I have no evidence either way; you have come out with your opinion and I am now asking you to justify it.

And the shareholders will be more worried with the financial situation of the Group rather than a decrease of flown freight through Manchester. I have already explained to you that the flown freight figure does not reflect what is actually going on at the site; I do not understand your fixation with this.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Nope, they will use A321`s instead
Er the A321s they currently have can’t actually manage a meaningful load on YYZ-UK, they don’t have the range. Air Transat and Aer Lingus use the much more capable A321NX for transatlantic ops, Rouge doesn’t have any. Any Rouge routes coming back are going to mainline if and until the stored B763s return, or some new NEO’s arrive.

[brian_dromey]

Er the A321s they currently have can’t actually manage a meaningful load on YYZ-UK, they don’t have the range. Air Transat and Aer Lingus use the much more capable A321NX for transatlantic ops, Rouge doesn’t have any. Any Rouge routes coming back are going to mainline if and until the stored B763s return, or some new NEO’s arrive.
AC were planning to acquire Air Transat, the competition authorities were not very happy about it, but AC may not want to spend money on a leisure airlines in the current climate. IAG has a similar issue in Spain with Air Europa. The Sharklet A321s AirTransat have would be suitable for Canada-UK routes, but no further. The NEO/LRS could push into Europe. I don't think Transat flies very much cargo, so can use all the payload for passengers and their baggage.

I see the recovery being stronger for the leisure market than business, I think companies will be reluctant to take risks with employee health and/or wish to conserve as much money as possible. In this scenario frequency might not be an issue for the next couple of years, certainly for the rest of this year. I think we might see a lot of daily routes being operated 2-3/4 weekly. AC might choose to fly their A330 or 777 on that basis. Watching the recover will be interesting.

[chaps1954]

Ozzy Most cargo is not time sensitive and doen`t really care where it flies to, if you go to Heathrow you will see many lorries with cargo
and most of the cargo has come from Amsterdam, Cologne, East Midlands and will not even go airside. and the same for Manchester.
Manchester could not handle the like of UPS, DHL and Amazon because there isn`t the space to park 6 or 7 aircraft at nightime and they
want it to go through one central operation BUT who owns EMA and STN where probably most of the cargo that doen`t come under belly
goes to.

[ATNotts]

I have already said that I have no evidence either way; you have come out with your opinion and I am now asking you to justify it.

And the shareholders will be more worried with the financial situation of the Group rather than a decrease of flown freight through Manchester. I have already explained to you that the flown freight figure does not reflect what is actually going on at the site; I do not understand your fixation with this.

Surely one of the key changes in the air cargo industry is the rise, and rise of the integrators - UPS, FedEx, TNT, DHL being the principal players. They offer a door to door service principally, but by no mean exclusively, for the smaller shipment sector that, before their dominance, used to phone the freight forwarder, who called the airline (or used their ABC / OAG) to get a rate, picked the shipment up, documented it then delivered it to the airline who flew it to destination, where another agent cleared it through customs and handed it to the delivery company to get ti to the customer. What a faff! How did anything move, with any speed and at a reasonable price? Answer, it did because a lot of different organisations worked hard to make sure it would, but the cost was hardly cheap.

The integrators like centralisation, so Stansted has been the destination of choice for for London and the Southeast, and for the rest of the UK the hub is EMA, with flights feeding into there from Scotland and Ireland, and from the other principal hubs such as Leipzig and Köln on the European mainland.

It is that, as much as anything else, that has seen a steady decline in all cargo services through the likes of Manchester, and for that matter, Gatwick.

[Mr A Tis]

Most of the Ad hoc wide body freight traffic has been picked up by Doncaster, who appear to have multiple daily wide body movements. I don't know, but I'd guess operating into Doncaster is a lot cheaper & without parking congestion.We can't also assume that all freight needs to come to the Manchester area. As pointed out, where the freight goes is very often decided by the likes of DHL, TNT, Fedex, Amazon etc.

[OzzyOzBorn]

I have already explained to you that the flown freight figure does not reflect what is actually going on at the site; I do not understand your fixation with this.

Ozzy Most cargo is not time sensitive and doen`t really care where it flies to, if you go to Heathrow you will see many lorries with cargo
and most of the cargo has come from Amsterdam, Cologne, East Midlands and will not even go airside. and the same for Manchester.

Alright then. I can't help but smile right now. The responses on here panned out exactly as I anticipated.

You see, certain corporate structures become so incestuous and inward-looking over time that they become quite convinced that there is only one 'correct' way to do business. Their way. Businesses which do things differently are viewed with scorn. Those who question the status quo draw a roll of the eyes and a 'here we go again' response ... someone else who just doesn't understand!

In the case of MAG Cargo's MO, it is as if everybody has had to learn ancient proverbs from 'Chairman Mag's Little Red Book'. Woe betide anybody who challenges the orthodoxy. Even when the truth machine reports -85.9%. Whilst the competition reports very healthy numbers in precisely the same market segment.

There can only be one possible explanation as to why an objective observer would question the sacred way in which MAG Cargo conducts its business. We're dealing with another idiot who simply doesn't understand how the industry works. Cue really simple "explanations" of the most basic elements of the industry. Because the subject will immediately realise that they're just being dumb and that MAG Cargo's way of doing things is truly beyond reproach. Once we've explained the difference between a truck and a plane, the annoying visitor will go away, chastised with a virtual pat on the head, acknowledging unconditionally that MAG Cargo's policy is the one true way. See the light. And don't dwell on that inconvenient -85.9%. It is of no concern to the blessed few who "get it".

But there is just one slight problem with that attitude. Well, more than one actually. This particular idiot has been in and around the industry for many years now. He actually does know the difference between a truck and a plane. But ... errr ... NO. He is not prepared to scurry away reassured that MAG Cargo has stumbled across the one true path to business glory. No, that -85.9% figure, drawn from a booming market sector, rings alarm bells for our observer. Is it even vaguely conceivable that MAG Cargo isn't perfect [GASP!!!]. Is it possible that it might be worth asking: "Is there a better way to approach this business?" MAG apologists say "Hell NO!!!". -85.9% says: "Hey! Look at me!!!"

Now here is the problem I have. I don't just look at MAN. I don't just look at MAG airports. I look at lots of airports. In fact, I look at lots of businesses across multiple sectors. I look at performance stats. I look at balance sheets. And I have to tell you that I even know the difference between a truck and a plane. I know what a consolidator does. Without having a condescending "explanation" provided so that I will finally "understand". Truth is, I've been familiar with this business for more years than I care to admit to.

So let me be more specific. I see a figure of -99.3% on the airport passenger stats. And I think: Not great, but wholly in line with the industry norm in this highly-challenging COVID-19 environment. I'm seeing harsh trading conditions, not company-specific underperformance. So I'm not inclined to be critical of this. But then I see that -85.9% stat for cargo. And that screams 'Red Flag!". Because - in this sector - comparable airports in Manchester's peer group are reporting buoyant numbers. In this circumstance, a good business will ask what it is doing wrong. What measures can be taken to improve. But MAG Cargo's perennial approach appears to be that only they understand the one true path, every other airport is doing it wrong, -85.9% is fine and dandy. Well, I'm not convinced.

MAG say that they don't want whole-plane freighter ops because they compete with and undermine the economics of scheduled passenger services offering underfloor cargo space. MAG can secure and retain such services because freighters are not competing with them. Here is my response. I am familiar with several airports which are well-diversified across multiple sectors. They accept whole-plane freighters; they accept mixed-use passenger / freight services. And yes, those services do compete for boxes on some level. But so do those boxes which head off on trucks to EMA / STN / DSA / LHR / AMS etc. That competition is there anyway. And what does the evidence tell us? Well, Manchester is losing a swathe of prestigious scheduled passenger services anyway, and its flown cargo throughput is down by a dire -85.9%. Excluding those freighters didn't save the day for them when it counted. Other airports have lost scheduled passenger services too ... but at least because their business is more diversified they offer more resilience to this economic crisis. And their cargo figures are great. So forgive me for suggesting that it is those airports - not MAG cargo - whose approach to this business is the correct one.

Now, let me run by you afew of the common myths promulgated in association with 'Chairman Mag's Little Red Book'. For brevity, I'll go with bullet-point format.

MYTH: MAN mustn't compete for whole-plane freight business because that would undermine our passenger schedules and we'd end up losing them.
My Response: Both types of service co-exist just fine at comparable airports. They do lose some passenger schedules. But so does MAN. Just the same. So it might be worth ... you know ... competing for the business???? That extra resilience could come in really useful during these tough economic times.

MYTH: There is no point in competing for whole-plane freighter business because MAG gets comparatively little revenue back in return.
My Response: Well, let's see. MAG gets the payment it asks for. If that figure isn't worthwhile, review the charges you levy. Meanwhile, other agencies on the airport campus do make money from flights of this sort. Valuable jobs are created and sustained. Businesses within the 'Northern Powerhouse' catchment are better served. Its a win-win.

MYTH: MAN is better off turning freighters away because they occupy a stand.
My Response: What is an aircraft parking stand for? Of course a freighter occupies a stand for the duration of its turnaround. And so does a passenger airliner. Productive use of assets is a good thing!

MYTH: Freight is not time-sensitive / Cargo doesn't care where it lands / Freight doesn't complain abut its route to destination.
My Response: Inanimate objects rarely complain very loudly. Funny that! But it doesn't mean they wouldn't be better served by an expedited more efficient route to the end user. We can't cite the silence of a box as a measure of satisfaction re its treatment! And actually, shippers do pay a premium for air freight because it generally IS time-sensitive. Otherwise it would go by sea, wouldn't it? Much cheaper. Time IS money.

MYTH: Manchester's freight offer is just fine. Everything gets where it is going just fine. No need to improve the cargo proposition at MAN!
My Response: Well, that wasn't the experience reported by 'The Hut Group', was it? They were so darned frustrated trying to get their goods from the NW to where they needed them in a timely fashion that they concluded forming their own cargo airline was the only workable solution! So that suggests that complacency is not OK and there is room for improvement. BTW, did the usual MAG Cargo suspects try to switch sell THG to "anywhere but here"? I'd love to know!

MYTH: Manchester is cargo-friendly in reality. If you don't accept that you're just another troll slagging off MAG.
My Response: Manchester appears to operate a default business strategy of discouraging flown cargo through MAN whenever a freighter aircraft is involved. Cargo leads are routed through a marketing team whose mission appears to be to switch-sell the business away from MAN come what may. Are they on bonuses for everything they lure away to EMA or STN regardless of what best serves the customer? From time to time, we hear rumours that FedEx - MAN's one based all-freighter operator - is going to up sticks to EMA. Yet they have stayed so far. Do these rumours stem from MAG's efforts to persuade them to move out rather than being something the airline would actually like to do? Or are the rumours just hot air? Afew years back, start-up freight carrier CargoLogicAir put out a PR piece explaining that they intended to set up a based B747F operation at MAN. I can only imagine the consternation that must have caused in MAG Towers. Fortunately, they popped up at STN afew months later. Phew ... close one!!! DHL announced planned routes from MAN in association with their new warehousing operation at Airport City. Flights appeared - very briefly - on a much smaller scale than anticipated. Then everything decamped to EMA never to be seen again. What angle did MAG Cargo take on this? Were they actively encouraging DHL to stay and develop a successful spoke from MAN to Leipzig? Or might it have been ... nah, your useless freighter is occupying a stand at MAN. It's making the place look untidy. Shift it to EMA!

MYTH: Manchester doesn't have sufficient stands to accommodate freighters.
My Response: Then that is down to exceptionally poor planning. Get it sorted! Though I suspect it won't be very difficult to accommodate freighters for the next few years now!

MYTH: There is no point in MAN pitching for freighter business. Apart from it being useless / waste of space / beneath our dignity, other airports are cheaper and offer a better package.
My Response: In 2008 MAN offered a superb proposition for freighters. If that is no longer so it is because MAG has neglected the sector by design. Other airports may now hold the whip-hand, but that is no excuse to throw in the towel at the starting post. Go out and compete for business again. If the handling arrangements are insufficient, improve them. Adopt a 'can do' mindset - MAN had that many years ago. No, MAN won't win all the contracts. Not by a long shot. Yes, the business has evolved since 2008 (but it is still there). But they will win some business if they just try. Be proactive! THG Air, CargoLogicAir's original plan, FedEx's stickiness: these developments indicate that there is interest in MAN if it is given half a chance.

So that is my take on this. An -85.9% drop in a buoyant sector needs to serve as a wake-up call. Complacency is not good enough. Other airports comparable to MAN have proven that whole-plane cargo and mixed-use passenger scheduled services can successfully co-exist. And in this harsh economic climate, the diversity this gives their businesses provides a level of resilience which MAN simply doesn't enjoy. That's not good. A re-examination of the business plan is called for wrt MAN's attitude to cargo. Telling me that I 'don't understand' the basics of this business may make you feel superior. But it doesn't support employment, it doesn't serve NW business to the level it deserves and it betrays the Northern Powerhouse 'levelling-up' agenda. And stupid as I am, I can't help but notice that all these other airports which dismiss the MAG Cargo 'divine path' are doing rather nicely with their cargo business right now.

So someone understands. I wonder who?

NOTE: BTW, You may have spotted that my comments refer to 'MAG Cargo'. I recognise that this is probably not the division's formal title (though it may be?). But it is important to differentiate. My criticism is specific to cargo, because IMO their strategy has been shown up as a complete disaster (sorry, apologists!). It would benefit from a major restructuring led by a consultant drawn from outside 'MAGthink'. My negative comments do not extend across MAG in general, as many departments have been doing an outstanding job and deserve all due accolades for what they have achieved. Cargo is the 'problem child', and my view is that it merits a total rethink. The mistakes have been 'found out'. The truth machine says -85.9%. Fact, not opinion.

[MAN777]

ATNotts
WOW thats quite a reply, thanks for spending time to thoroughly explain your views.

I think its obvious that the big drop in freight carried is because the underbody freight didnt fly because the flights were grounded. The figure is no shock to anybody and the addition of a few daily 747Fs would make little difference to the figures.

As soon as the flights start up the tonnage will rise again.👍

You sound like an office based stats man to me ?

Have you ever actually been airside during a dedicated 747F turnaround ? If you had you would know its not just a case of parking an aircraft for an hour. The dedicated ground equipment and staffing levels required are very different from a passenger flight. Also the staging areas for freight on freight off require a lot of concrete. Establishing all this for a few movements a day is not cost effective, if it was profitable MAG would have continued to support freighter OPs at MAN

MAG is simply keeping its house in order matching trimmed assets to supply most profitable return, it will be interesting to see how the proposed THG operation pans out.

[chaps1954]

On Alpha % site comments made that a number of flights have been rurned away due stand stortage which I can believe as
apparently upto 114 aircraft have been parked up and listening to all the juggling Virgin have had with aircraft.

[OzzyOzBorn]

When a video was made showing MAN's apron as seen from a microlight aircraft - supported by stills taken from the tower on or around the same date - I counted aircraft on view as being in the high eighties. I think it was 88, though I've discarded that piece of paper now. Certainly a number in that ballpark. This included the five TUI MAX's which are away from the main parking area, but not anything which may have been hangared. The number was well below 114. Maybe that was the number recorded on FR24 which miscounts Barton vicinity movements as Manchester arrivals and leaves them in the totals for ages because they aren't subsequently noted as departing again?

With several Thomas Cook and FlyBe aircraft to leave permanently, plus other frames from some solvent carriers such as Virgin, there should be plenty of vacant stands to backfill before long. And ten new stands coming into service to the NW of T2 Pier 1 as well.

[750XL]

There's also a number of stands constantly being loss for taxiway repairs, upgrades, fuel hydrant installation etc.

[OzzyOzBorn]

There's also a number of stands constantly being loss for taxiway repairs, upgrades, fuel hydrant installation etc.

Are those jobs actually progressing (hope so) or are the contractors still furloughed and work frozen?

[UnderASouthernSky]

It's not just available stands that you need for freight, but a stand to fit the aircraft. A stand just freed up by a retiring Flybe Dash 8 will not accommodate an A330F. And certain freighters need tie down points by the nose wheel, which further limits which stands can be used by wide body freighters on a busy airfield - MAN or elsewhere.

[OzzyOzBorn]

It's not just available stands that you need for freight, but a stand to fit the aircraft. A stand just freed up by a retiring Flybe Dash 8 will not accommodate an A330F. And certain freighters need tie down points by the nose wheel, which further limits which stands can be used by wide body freighters on a busy airfield - MAN or elsewhere.

With all due respect, this point is so glaringly obvious that there didn't seem to be any point in raising it on a forum geared to a professional user-base. But just because a stand is capable of accommodating a B747-8F turnaround, it doesn't follow that it will be left vacant in case one shows up. Stands are generally made available for use by multiple aircraft types up to the maximum size permitted. So a bit of pre-planning is required to ensure that sufficient capable stands are available to accommodate the larger types scheduled to arrive at any given time. But MAN routinely plans for this, in common with other major airports. It should not be a barrier to including freighters in the schedule. In an extreme case, it should always be possible to tow a long-term parked blocking aircraft out of the way. For example, a B738 should easily fit on one of the ten newly-constructed stands. Parked up aircraft can be repositioned according to need.

[MAN777]

The other major issue is finding a handling agent to do the turnaround. Will they be prepared to invest in all the equipment and staff training for a handful of freighter movements. I havent had much contact with MAN for some time and Im not sure whether the hi-lo’s are even still available ?

[techair]

There isn’t a main deck hi-lo available at Manchester any more. I spoke to a decision maker from a large HA a fair bit back about this point and it works out the very expensive equipment could be employed far more profitably at a different station with far more freight flights. Who would’ve thought it!

[chaps1954]

I don`t thinnk there are that many stands that can take a B748 because of length of wings

[ATNotts]

ATNotts
WOW thats quite a reply, thanks for spending time to thoroughly explain your views.

I think its obvious that the big drop in freight carried is because the underbody freight didnt fly because the flights were grounded. The figure is no shock to anybody and the addition of a few daily 747Fs would make little difference to the figures.

As soon as the flights start up the tonnage will rise again.👍

You sound like an office based stats man to me ?

Have you ever actually been airside during a dedicated 747F turnaround ? If you had you would know its not just a case of parking an aircraft for an hour. The dedicated ground equipment and staffing levels required are very different from a passenger flight. Also the staging areas for freight on freight off require a lot of concrete. Establishing all this for a few movements a day is not cost effective, if it was profitable MAG would have continued to support freighter OPs at MAN

MAG is simply keeping its house in order matching trimmed assets to supply most profitable return, it will be interesting to see how the proposed THG operation pans out.

Actually not office based, or a qualified "stats man" but I am interested in statistics since I know that they can be made to fit almost whatever narrative they are intended to underpin. Did however spend too many years in logistics and saw how the air cargo business changed, and have observed large cargo aircraft being turned around and certainly turning around a 747 in all cargo config in a hour would be nigh on impossible.

MAG will have made a decision that passengers are their route to maximising profitability at Manchester, although I suspect they might have some moments of self doubt during the last 12 weeks or so. And it may not just be MAG, obviously it's the handling agents that have to be staffed up for cargo handling, and if they've taken a conscious decision not to invest money in cargo handling large scale all cargo operations ain't about to happen. The management at EMA must be pretty happy they puts their eggs into the cargo basket, since passnger flight completely stopped for about 10 weeks.

[SWBKCB]

The management at EMA must be pretty happy they puts their eggs into the cargo basket, since passnger flight completely stopped for about 10 weeks.

Yet curiously in all this palaver over MAG and it's cargo strategy, the fact that EMA's throughput dropped in May doesn't get a mention?

[ATNotts]

Yet curiously in all this palaver over MAG and it's cargo strategy, the fact that EMA's throughput dropped in May doesn't get a mention?

That's PR and marketing people for you. MAG have particularly savvy PR and Marketing departments.

[mmeteesside]

There isn’t a main deck hi-lo available at Manchester any more. I spoke to a decision maker from a large HA a fair bit back about this point and it works out the very expensive equipment could be employed far more profitably at a different station with far more freight flights. Who would’ve thought it!
Who handles the daily 757F then?

[chaps1954]

Big difference from B757 to a B747 in the way they are handled

[OzzyOzBorn]

Lots of negative "can't do" postings. MAN is by far the UK's busiest airport outside London (well, in normal times!) and a vital component of the Northern Powerhouse initiative. If an item of ground handling equipment is required, order it! Or bring back whatever they shipped off to EMA/STN. "There aren't enough cargo flights to justify the expense ..." No, and there won't be for as long as MAG policy is to switch-sell cargo leads away from MAN. Bring back the capability and present a welcoming environment for cargo business. You make the investment first, then the business follows. That's how it works.

My earlier reference to the B747-8F was just for illustrative purposes. There are many other freighter types! MAN certainly did have a B748 capable stand quite recently - whether or not it still is so would depend on changes made in realigning the taxiways. It certainly shouldn't be beyond the capabilities of an airport of MAN's stature to ensure this capability going forward in any case.

Let's have more of the "can do" attitude upon which MAN built its early success. Now it seems to be a list of "well we can't do this because ..." Handling a cargo turnaround isn't rocket science.

[ATNotts]

Let's have more of the "can do" attitude upon which MAN built its early success. Now it seems to be a list of "well we can't do this because ..." Handling a cargo turnaround isn't rocket science.

But it's not as easy as that, if you're thinking about large freighters. Sure, it won't a problem unloading a "just in time" urgent shipment from a Cessna Caravan, it can be hand balled off. However you can't just put someone off passenger check-in onto a Hi-Lo and expect them to operate it, nor tow around pallet dollies, or drag pallets down the floor of a 747. if you haven't got the trained staff on hand in the first place just switching on a cargo handling service isn't going to be child's play.

[OzzyOzBorn]

But it's not as easy as that, if you're thinking about large freighters. Sure, it won't a problem unloading a "just in time" urgent shipment from a Cessna Caravan, it can be hand balled off. However you can't just put someone off passenger check-in onto a Hi-Lo and expect them to operate it, nor tow around pallet dollies, or drag pallets down the floor of a 747.

I never suggested they should expect an employee to undertake a task which they haven't been trained to do. Every job airside depends on appropriate training. MAN has done this before and it can do so again. They handled B77F's relatively recently, so it is probable that some of that expertise is still around anyway.

[750XL]

Who handles the daily 757F then?

Fedex self handle their own flights at MAN, the warehouse guys come airside for the load ups/offloads then back into the warehouse for the rest of their shift.

If an item of ground handling equipment is required, order it!

Do you have any idea how much these things cost to purchase? Yet alone maintain. You're not going to get much change out of £1 million. Who in their right mind is going to purchase that, to have it sat gathering dust all year? Perhaps get one ad-hoc charter flight in, that you manage to charge £2000 ground handling for - on a good day.

[chaps1954]

Now as we have read this morning SwissPort are making over 50% of UK staff redundent (4500UK)

[OzzyOzBorn]

Who in their right mind is going to purchase that, to have it sat gathering dust all year?

Hmmm. You clearly rate MAG's cargo marketing team very highly! Actually, you may have a point. Some new direction needed?

And the UK's largest airport outside London can't afford a £1m piece of equipment. Which they used to have until quite recently? Oh dear ...

[UnderASouthernSky]

Hmmm. You clearly rate MAG's cargo marketing team very highly! Actually, you may have a point. Some new direction needed?

And the UK's largest airport outside London can't afford a £1m piece of equipment. Which they used to have until quite recently? Oh dear ...

Isn't it the handling agent and not the airport authority who owns/leases handling equipment?

[750XL]

Hmmm. You clearly rate MAG's cargo marketing team very highly! Actually, you may have a point. Some new direction needed?

And the UK's largest airport outside London can't afford a £1m piece of equipment. Which they used to have until quite recently? Oh dear ...

You might want to do a bit more research into how airports in the real world actually operate :sad:

MAG have nothing to do with any of the ground handling equipment, it's all owned by third party handling agents... Such as Swissport, who have just announced 4500+ job losses.

[OzzyOzBorn]

You might want to do a bit more research into how airports in the real world actually operate https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/puppy_dog_eyes.gif

I've done plenty of that over many years and I've responded to you with courtesy. Is it too much to ask for similar in return?


MAG have nothing to do with any of the ground handling equipment, it's all owned by third party handling agents... Such as Swissport, who have just announced 4500+ job losses.

Well its not the booming cargo sector which has given the handling agents this headache, is it? Best to bring in some cargo business and protect jobs.

[Manchester Exile]

The obvious question in the freight debate is this: Is Manchester losing freight to airports that are *outside* of the MAG group? If the answer is no - and OzzyOzBorn mentioned at the start of the debate that freight enquiries into Manchester are being redirected to East Midlands - then there really isn't an issue. From a MAG perspective, it doesn't matter if the freight is being flown into East Midlands or Manchester.

If airlines are being turned away from Manchester and then flying to non-MAG airports, then there is a debate to be had. But even in this case, you would think that MAG bosses have done their due diligence on whether it's economically worthwhile to win new freight routes. If parking stands and other infrastructure can be used more profitably by passenger aircraft, then you have to respect that business decision.

I'm not privy to any information as to what freight routes have been lost / turned down at Manchester, so I don't know the answer to my own question. But Manchester Airport is part of a group of airports operating as a single business, so a significant decline in activity at Manchester is not necessarily indicative of a loss of revenue for the overall group.

[SWBKCB]

Before the PPE blip (and lets all hope it is a blip), wasn't the dedicated freighter business in decline? At the very least it was getting concentrated in the hands of the integrators/'parcel companies", so unless you want to invest a lot of money in becoming a hub for the big guys (like EMA has...) wouldn't you be chasing a declining market?

[brian_dromey]

Before the PPE blip (and lets all hope it is a blip), wasn't the dedicated freighter business in decline? At the very least it was getting concentrated in the hands of the integrators/'parcel companies", so unless you want to invest a lot of money in becoming a hub for the big guys (like EMA has...) wouldn't you be chasing a declining market?

My understanding is that demand has grown, but the main driver for increased freight demand is the loss of passenger freight capacity, which will be temporary, to some degree. The loss of passenger cargo capacity is why MANs cargo figures have declined so dramatically, so quickly, rather than a foreseeable issue with the business model.

MAN has become very dependant on passengers spending money in the terminals, on lounges and parking, fast track, etc. The refusal/reluctance to accept diversions and other general aviation and as-hoc charters has frequently been a source of frustration on the board. Scheduled passenger activity is clearly MANs focus.

[chaps1954]

As has been said before with all the new stands being built and great stretches of tarmac not available at present thing have been very difficult to say the least.
One for Ozzy a China Eastern B777 is on it`s way with CARGO

[JerseyAero]

As has been said before with all the new stands being built and great stretches of tarmac not available at present thing have been very difficult to say the least.
One for Ozzy a China Eastern B777 is on it`s way with CARGO

China Southern en-route today - the China Eastern flights are in July.

[OzzyOzBorn]

The obvious question in the freight debate is this: Is Manchester losing freight to airports that are *outside* of the MAG group? If the answer is no - and OzzyOzBorn mentioned at the start of the debate that freight enquiries into Manchester are being redirected to East Midlands - then there really isn't an issue. From a MAG perspective, it doesn't matter if the freight is being flown into East Midlands or Manchester.


You are absolutely right that this argument is at the heart of the matter. MAG (I believe) would argue that they get to keep most of the revenue in-group anyway, so why bust a gut to maximise the potential of Manchester Airport in isolation? Of course, not all flown cargo which would be best served by MAN goes to other MAG airports (see DSA and assorted trucking operations). But the amount which does is sufficient for the narrow interests of MAG accountants to be satisfied. I suspect that this is the rationale which has been used to justify the managed destruction of Manchester Airport's capabilities in the field of whole-plane freight from exemplary in 2008 to almost non-existent now. This, and the discredited argument that competition from freighters would mean long-haul mixed passenger / cargo services not being retained at MAN. The issue of compatible stand availability derives from this: it becomes a classic 'chicken and egg' situation. MAN didn't invest in retaining cargo capability because they didn't want it for internal MAG group reasons; now it is argued that MAN shouldn't compete for freight business because they lack sufficient capability. The one begets the other in a vicious cycle.

But here is the problem. The scenario we describe above could also merit scrutiny as abuse of a monopoly position in the market. By divvying up the spoils in an uncompetitive manner between two airports whose catchments overlap, an operator's pockets may gain more coin, but the wider interests of the regions they are entrusted to serve is betrayed in the process. Is it perhaps appropriate to examine whether MAN and EMA in particular should actually be operated under the same ownership at all? Would the interests of both regions not be better served if these airports operated in open competition with each other in a free market?

We sometimes encounter a situation where the narrow interests of a business owner and the region it serves are not in alignment. This has happened more than once with regard to Manchester Airport. The decision not to expand T3 to facilitate Ryanair growth (that feels so long ago in this C-19 economy!) was a case in point. The ROI was insufficient to interest MAG's accountants, though the NW region would have benefitted from expansion to a far greater extent than MAG itself. There was arguably a case for state aid to bridge that gap, but that is another discussion, and post C-19 this debate is moot for the foreseeable future.

Returning to cargo specifically, the debate boils down to this. Manchester Airports Group can (if it so chooses) save money by distorting the market, directing cargo business to site(s) which suit them. But if they elect to do this, they disregard the best interests of the region served by Manchester Airport. Their service to business in the NW is sub-optimal, falling well short of the level the region should aspire to. Employment opportunities are not optimised which negatively impacts the wider community - maybe not specifically wrt MAG's own payroll, but certainly impacting that of other agencies working across the airport campus and beyond. The Northern Powerhouse initiative is undermined by Manchester Airport's lack of commitment to the project in practical terms.

So perhaps those with a stake in this debate divide into two distinct categories: those who believe that a marginal improvement to MAG's P&L account at group level justifies subverting the immediate interests of Manchester Airport and the region it serves, and those who believe that the potential of Manchester Airport should be optimised across diverse sectors (including cargo) to best serve the NW public, business, and partners across the Northern Powerhouse initiative.

Before the PPE blip (and lets all hope it is a blip), wasn't the dedicated freighter business in decline?

Yes, the market is smaller than it once was. But it hasn't gone away. That the market has declined from its peak is no reason not to compete for the business which remains. It is still a big market. Also, if we were to argue that it is not worth pursuing opportunities to optimise market share in a declining market, then logically we should accept that MAN should stop competing for new passenger services now. :-)

My understanding is that demand has grown, but the main driver for increased freight demand is the loss of passenger freight capacity, which will be temporary, to some degree. The loss of passenger cargo capacity is why MANs cargo figures have declined so dramatically, so quickly, rather than a foreseeable issue with the business model.

I think we can all agree that MAN's cargo throughput will recover from this recent low as scheduled passenger services with underfloor cargo capacity are restored. But that recovery will be to a level short of the already sub-optimal throughput which MAG was content to accept pre COVID-19: the freight-share left behind when all the whole-plane cargo potential has been removed from the equation. This crisis has exposed the reality that those airports which operated a diverse model across a range of business opportunities are in a far more resilient position now. The agencies working across their campuses will not be obliged to make such deep employment cuts as at those airports which have placed all their eggs in the passenger services basket.

One for Ozzy a China Eastern B777 is on it`s way with CARGO

Bring it on. More like this please. Though I hope that the need for this particular type of cargo will quickly reduce for non-aviation reasons!

EDIT: I've just been advised by an impeccable source that today's B77W flight from China is a passenger service, not a freight charter.

[GEB74]

DON'T FEED THE 'FREIGHT TROLL'
How many different profiles do you have active Bagso?? - you'll be replying to yourself again if you carry on.......
Can you not idly fixate on something else, somewhere else?? Your weird obsession is tedious and the situation on the ground WILL NOT CHANGE because you rant on an internet forum.

[commit aviation]

Isn’t that the point of a group approach? You develop synergies which deliver cost savings? If a group gets too monopolistic then the government steps in to manage that situation. That is what happened with the BAA. How small would you believe a group has to be to not be creating a monopoly? Whilst I am no financier, I have said before I presume that the local councils (who are in effect about 50% of the business owners) must be broadly happy with business approach and the returns they see in “normal times” or they wouldn’t continue to back MAG. MAN and the many on site third parties employ many of their residents whilst the other MAG airports and subsidiary companies provide a return that usually helps offset council tax bills.

Interestingly, in spite of the breakup of the BAA, I haven’t seen LHR expanding into full freighter beyond the limited quantity they already had. I appreciate they did do so for a short period at the early part of C-19 but it is not a long-term change of strategy as far as I can tell. So it doesn’t necessarily follow that MAN would suddenly launch back into freight just because they didn’t own EMA.

Whilst the breakup saw LGW, STN, LTN, LCY and SEN fight for different portions of the passenger market, the freight market in the south east appears to have changed little. I would suspect the most significant redistribution of the freight market here may have been the closure of Manston some years back.

Now you might argue that having other airport interests dilutes the focus on MAN and I wouldn’t disagree that it could however the fact that the councils collectively wish to protect their residents (e.g. votes!) is likely to see MAN interests being at the forefront of decision making. Indeed you can see that Manchester transformation has continued while Stansted transformation appears to have slowed if not stopped altogether.

I read recently that 90% of the UK’s population is within 4 hours travel time of EMA which is possibly why many of the logistics providers like it. DSA must have similar ratios and I understand your point regarding competitor airports but would you really advocate MAG landing that business at any cost?

We can at least agree that there are two distinct categories! Ultimately, we don’t have the numbers but I would like to believe that those who do, look at what is in the best interests of the group because ultimately that is likely to be in the best interests of the long term future of MAN, it’s employees and the wider community.