Carlisle Lake District Airport - redevelopment
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Useful to the debate on airport viability is the size of local population. From Government 2001 census we have the following approximate figures:
Urban:
=====
Carlisle 100,000
Newcastle, Gateshead, North and South Tyneside conurbation 800,000
Sunderland 280,000
Durham 87,000
Counties:
=======
Cumbria 487,000
Northumberland 307,000
County Durham 493,000
Dumfries and Galloway 148,000
Tyne and Wear 1,075,000
I'm not sure why the Tyne and Wear figure is so different from the corresponding conurbation figure.
Although Cumbria is a large county, probably three fifths of its area is uninhabited hills and mountains. Those population centres in south Cumbria (principally Kendal?) would probably go south to Manchester.
On the face of it these numbers are not good for Carlisle's viability, BUT the low cost revolution doesn't necessarily take convenience into account - consider all the out of town airports that Ryanair use - Torp is 50 miles from Oslo, Hann is further from Frankfurt even Stansted is hardly in the centre of London. So, conceivably, the populations of Tyneside and the neighbouring counties to Cumbria could consider using the airport if for instance it was the only one in the region that say Easyjet operated a flight to Barcelona or Majorca or the like - keyed in with an Easyjet/Ryanair coach service like they already do in Rome, Oslo etc, back to the city centres - it might just work.
Carlisle has tried and failed before with scheduled routes but the you don't need to be told that the airline world has changed beyond all recognition in the last 5-8 years.
However, to some
Urban:
=====
Carlisle 100,000
Newcastle, Gateshead, North and South Tyneside conurbation 800,000
Sunderland 280,000
Durham 87,000
Counties:
=======
Cumbria 487,000
Northumberland 307,000
County Durham 493,000
Dumfries and Galloway 148,000
Tyne and Wear 1,075,000
I'm not sure why the Tyne and Wear figure is so different from the corresponding conurbation figure.
Although Cumbria is a large county, probably three fifths of its area is uninhabited hills and mountains. Those population centres in south Cumbria (principally Kendal?) would probably go south to Manchester.
On the face of it these numbers are not good for Carlisle's viability, BUT the low cost revolution doesn't necessarily take convenience into account - consider all the out of town airports that Ryanair use - Torp is 50 miles from Oslo, Hann is further from Frankfurt even Stansted is hardly in the centre of London. So, conceivably, the populations of Tyneside and the neighbouring counties to Cumbria could consider using the airport if for instance it was the only one in the region that say Easyjet operated a flight to Barcelona or Majorca or the like - keyed in with an Easyjet/Ryanair coach service like they already do in Rome, Oslo etc, back to the city centres - it might just work.
Carlisle has tried and failed before with scheduled routes but the you don't need to be told that the airline world has changed beyond all recognition in the last 5-8 years.
However, to some
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bravo - not a conspiracy theory, merely a realistic interpretation of the brochure by a business head.
Eventually Stobart will turn Carlisle Airport into a business park and whilst we live in hope that they'll keep an aviation facility in situ, there's no guarantee.
Stobart is no longer the cuddly family bussiness it used to be, it's now owned by City venture capitalists whose only interest is making it significantly more profitable than it was before they sell it on.
Eventually Stobart will turn Carlisle Airport into a business park and whilst we live in hope that they'll keep an aviation facility in situ, there's no guarantee.
Stobart is no longer the cuddly family bussiness it used to be, it's now owned by City venture capitalists whose only interest is making it significantly more profitable than it was before they sell it on.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Niknak,
You wrote:
****2. The majority of air freight being flown to and from the North West is in fact flown from Newcastle, Glasgow and Prestwick, ****
True. But then Carlisle has never really been marketed, used, owned by freight specialists.
Interesting facts:
the only motorway link between Scotland and England is nearing completion at Carlisle.
Edinburgh, on the east coast of Scotland, is actually WEST of Carlisle!
So Carlisle is maybe a more than useful Scottish (yes, I know it is in England!) hub than Prestwick, relatively isolated to the west of Scotland. Glasgow and Edinburgh are going to be very busy while redevelpoment work goes on (night closures while the new runway is built?)
****** 3. The catchement area surrounding the airport is insufficiant to support passenger air services to any destination, once again Newcastle and Glasgow already provide such needs ******
If you live anywhere east and south of Glasgow city and have to cross the Kingston Bridge on the M*, then Carlisle isn't that far ;-) If you are in Hamilton, Motherwell, Airdrie etc then an hour down the three-lane motorway to Carlisle is better for the blood pressure than the hour to an hour and a half in stop start through the city!
Very best to all - I hope the new plans will mean an end to helicopters hover taxiiing past parked aircraft to refuel!
You wrote:
****2. The majority of air freight being flown to and from the North West is in fact flown from Newcastle, Glasgow and Prestwick, ****
True. But then Carlisle has never really been marketed, used, owned by freight specialists.
Interesting facts:
the only motorway link between Scotland and England is nearing completion at Carlisle.
Edinburgh, on the east coast of Scotland, is actually WEST of Carlisle!
So Carlisle is maybe a more than useful Scottish (yes, I know it is in England!) hub than Prestwick, relatively isolated to the west of Scotland. Glasgow and Edinburgh are going to be very busy while redevelpoment work goes on (night closures while the new runway is built?)
****** 3. The catchement area surrounding the airport is insufficiant to support passenger air services to any destination, once again Newcastle and Glasgow already provide such needs ******
If you live anywhere east and south of Glasgow city and have to cross the Kingston Bridge on the M*, then Carlisle isn't that far ;-) If you are in Hamilton, Motherwell, Airdrie etc then an hour down the three-lane motorway to Carlisle is better for the blood pressure than the hour to an hour and a half in stop start through the city!
Very best to all - I hope the new plans will mean an end to helicopters hover taxiiing past parked aircraft to refuel!
niknak,
You seem to be remarkably poorly informed, I'm afraid.
re the airport - there are other matters afoot which almost guarantee the future of Carlisle Airport as an airport, not an industrial estate. I'm afraid that I'm not willing to disclose on a public forum what these developments are (yet.) Rest assured - the brochure is genuine.
Eddie Stobart is now part of WA Developments, another proud Cumbrian company. There might be some VC cash involved (isn't there everywhere?) but the company is currently going through a phase of mergers and expansion. Is this in the drive for higher profits? Of course it is. What company doesn't strive for higher profits?
Andrew Tinkler is definitely not a 'City venture capitalist'. He's a Cumbrian lad, through and through.
You seem to be remarkably poorly informed, I'm afraid.
re the airport - there are other matters afoot which almost guarantee the future of Carlisle Airport as an airport, not an industrial estate. I'm afraid that I'm not willing to disclose on a public forum what these developments are (yet.) Rest assured - the brochure is genuine.
Eddie Stobart is now part of WA Developments, another proud Cumbrian company. There might be some VC cash involved (isn't there everywhere?) but the company is currently going through a phase of mergers and expansion. Is this in the drive for higher profits? Of course it is. What company doesn't strive for higher profits?
Andrew Tinkler is definitely not a 'City venture capitalist'. He's a Cumbrian lad, through and through.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I couldn't get the brochure link to work, so I don't know how big this airport is going to be. But if you were in the logistics business and wanted to run international freight wouldn't some where like Carlisle be just the place?
Relatively low population density - few noise complaints
Quiet airspace
Uncongested airport - little demand for pax services
Close to the major North South arterial route, both road and rail
Looks like a great place to run freight from/to.
Relatively low population density - few noise complaints
Quiet airspace
Uncongested airport - little demand for pax services
Close to the major North South arterial route, both road and rail
Looks like a great place to run freight from/to.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: up North
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eddie Stobart is now part of WA Developments, another proud Cumbrian company.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Age: 52
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What on earth is wrong with some people? Why does the glass always have to be half empty?
Airfield after airfield is gradually disappearing. By way of example have we all seen the Dunsfold website? It's here . . .
If someone is prepared to make a substantial inventment in this country's GA infrastructure they should be applauded.
Airfield after airfield is gradually disappearing. By way of example have we all seen the Dunsfold website? It's here . . .
If someone is prepared to make a substantial inventment in this country's GA infrastructure they should be applauded.
And I wonder where it's going to be based? On an industrial estate or... at an airport maybe, niknak?
Better red than ...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Posts: 1,412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm thinking about dodgy foundations and the like
Recent comments from the airport manager says they are not aiming for the B.737/LCC/"Bucket and Spade" market - runway not long enough (1,771 metres) and market too small. The plans are for five return passenger flights a day plus six air-freight flights. Passenger flights operated by 30-seater Jetstream 41 or similar aircraft upto 80 seaters (Dash 8-400's?). So Eastern/flyBe rather than Easy/Ryanair. Hopefully Luton/Stansted first then Dublin / Amsterdam / Belfast / Paris.
Airport would be used as HQ for haulage business Eddie Stobart and for WA Developments, currently at Kingstown. Both will be moved to Preston if planning permission not given in time.
Plans prepared by same consultants as Doncaster Sheffield Airport.
New runway needed because the existing runway is in a poor state and subject to weight restrictions. The replacement will be built alongside to allow the old runway to continue in use during construction.
Airport is within the buffer zone for Hadrian’s Wall, a World Heritage Site
Airport would be used as HQ for haulage business Eddie Stobart and for WA Developments, currently at Kingstown. Both will be moved to Preston if planning permission not given in time.
Plans prepared by same consultants as Doncaster Sheffield Airport.
New runway needed because the existing runway is in a poor state and subject to weight restrictions. The replacement will be built alongside to allow the old runway to continue in use during construction.
Airport is within the buffer zone for Hadrian’s Wall, a World Heritage Site
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The economics of any proposed airport development simply don't add up, whereas the econonomics of an industrial estate do.
The potential costs of the new runway alone are at least £30m, another £10m for new taxiways, ILS and hangerage, then you've got the cost of the distribution centre and a final bill in the region of £50m with the prospect of not paying that off this side of the year 2050.
Even given the business brain behind Stobart, they wouldn't be able to compete in the air freight industry (of which they have little experience).
Passenger services have come and gone at Carlisle, it would be nice to think that they could make something of it, but it's unlikely.
The present airport cannot support low cost operators without the above investment and even then the catchment area is not sufficiant to make such operaions, or scheduled flights, feasible.
£50m for an airport with high overheads and little income, which will take many years, if ever, to make a profit.
or
Around half that for a retail/industrial estate which has few overheads and earns hard cash immediately.????????
I can see the present runway remaining in situ, being reduced in width and possibly length to make repairs more economic, some other cosmetic tarting up and the rest of the site being developed for industrial use only.
The potential costs of the new runway alone are at least £30m, another £10m for new taxiways, ILS and hangerage, then you've got the cost of the distribution centre and a final bill in the region of £50m with the prospect of not paying that off this side of the year 2050.
Even given the business brain behind Stobart, they wouldn't be able to compete in the air freight industry (of which they have little experience).
Passenger services have come and gone at Carlisle, it would be nice to think that they could make something of it, but it's unlikely.
The present airport cannot support low cost operators without the above investment and even then the catchment area is not sufficiant to make such operaions, or scheduled flights, feasible.
£50m for an airport with high overheads and little income, which will take many years, if ever, to make a profit.
or
Around half that for a retail/industrial estate which has few overheads and earns hard cash immediately.????????
I can see the present runway remaining in situ, being reduced in width and possibly length to make repairs more economic, some other cosmetic tarting up and the rest of the site being developed for industrial use only.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That may be true if that was the only story and Stobart's only business was as an airport operator.
The aren't and have other business' and plans that will help come to fruition because of the airport.
The airport doesn't neccessarily have to make money, at least not initially anyway
The aren't and have other business' and plans that will help come to fruition because of the airport.
The airport doesn't neccessarily have to make money, at least not initially anyway
I agree - I think the main motive here is to get a nice new HQ/distribution centre quickly, with the airport bit being used to twist the councils arm re planning permission/infrastucture costs.
Can't see the aviation element being a money spinner, but airports are sexier than distribution centres...
Think they're playing the same game as Peel at DTVA.
Can't see the aviation element being a money spinner, but airports are sexier than distribution centres...
Think they're playing the same game as Peel at DTVA.
niknak,
Have you even been to Carlisle Airport?
If you've been recently, you would've seen the various archaeological digs and other preparatory work that has been done in preparation for the new runway.
If this is all a very elaborate smokescreen (as you allude), Stobarts seem to be going to an awful lot of effort in order to build just another industrial estate.
And FYI, the loco operators (Ryanair, Easyjet et al) are not the target market.
Have you even been to Carlisle Airport?
If you've been recently, you would've seen the various archaeological digs and other preparatory work that has been done in preparation for the new runway.
If this is all a very elaborate smokescreen (as you allude), Stobarts seem to be going to an awful lot of effort in order to build just another industrial estate.
And FYI, the loco operators (Ryanair, Easyjet et al) are not the target market.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: ....
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comments please:
Seeing that they are going to the expense of building a new runway, why don't they consider adding 400m or so at the western end (and get the council to fund the movement of the road to allow this). This would give sufficient distance for all B737 and thus LoCo operations.
Landing Distances required:
Carlisle is currently just over 1800m long. As an example, Rome Ciampino is around 2200m long and very busy with both Ryanair and Easyjet 737 operations.
Seeing that they are going to the expense of building a new runway, why don't they consider adding 400m or so at the western end (and get the council to fund the movement of the road to allow this). This would give sufficient distance for all B737 and thus LoCo operations.
Landing Distances required:
can give you figures for the required landing distances of a B737-300:
60t (above our max. of 57.6)
dry runway: 1710m (flaps 40), 1790m (flaps 30)
wet runway: 1970m, 2050m
dry autoland: 2020m, 2100m
wet autoland: 2280m, 2360m
34t
dry runway: 990m (flaps 40), 1030 (flaps 30)
wet runway: 1140m, 1180m
dry autoland: 1300m, 1340m
wet autoland: 1450m, 1490m
Conditions: Sea Level, ISA, Zero Wind, Anti-skid operative, Automatic Speed Brakes
Definition of required landing distance:
The Required Landing Distance is the demonstrated landing distance divided by 0.6; demonstrated landing distance is based on a speed of 1.3xVs in landing config at the 50ft point; dry smooth level, hard surfaced runway; brakes fully applied, no thrust reverse.
Required landing distance wet is 1.15 times the dry one.
For emergencies actual landing distances are used (but you have to keep in mind that you won't reach the Boenig test pilots' values), for example:
One Engine Inoperative, Flaps 15 Landing, Standard Conditions, 46t: 820m
(1m = 3.281ft; 1t = 2204.6lb)
60t (above our max. of 57.6)
dry runway: 1710m (flaps 40), 1790m (flaps 30)
wet runway: 1970m, 2050m
dry autoland: 2020m, 2100m
wet autoland: 2280m, 2360m
34t
dry runway: 990m (flaps 40), 1030 (flaps 30)
wet runway: 1140m, 1180m
dry autoland: 1300m, 1340m
wet autoland: 1450m, 1490m
Conditions: Sea Level, ISA, Zero Wind, Anti-skid operative, Automatic Speed Brakes
Definition of required landing distance:
The Required Landing Distance is the demonstrated landing distance divided by 0.6; demonstrated landing distance is based on a speed of 1.3xVs in landing config at the 50ft point; dry smooth level, hard surfaced runway; brakes fully applied, no thrust reverse.
Required landing distance wet is 1.15 times the dry one.
For emergencies actual landing distances are used (but you have to keep in mind that you won't reach the Boenig test pilots' values), for example:
One Engine Inoperative, Flaps 15 Landing, Standard Conditions, 46t: 820m
(1m = 3.281ft; 1t = 2204.6lb)
Last edited by clearfinalsno1; 2nd Nov 2007 at 20:54.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Scottish Borders
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carlisle
Paid visit to Carlisle yesterday, looks like they are confident of planning permission. Surveyors and engineers on site, diggers and large dumpers parked up. Noted Haughey forum says the new hangar might be demolished as it is too high and close to new runway.
