MP supports finninigley airport
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
682:
Historically, West Yorks punters may have travelled to MAN, but the 320s and 321s I have operated out of the nation's highest have always been full...
Is this a tribute to local marketing by the tour operators, or a natural aversity to travel over the '62?
Either way, LBA to Spain/Canaries is always chokka.
Historically, West Yorks punters may have travelled to MAN, but the 320s and 321s I have operated out of the nation's highest have always been full...
Is this a tribute to local marketing by the tour operators, or a natural aversity to travel over the '62?
Either way, LBA to Spain/Canaries is always chokka.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Leeds
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
overstress: There has never been a problem filling flights ex LBA – its catchment area is large and the demand it generates is probably no different to that of any of other major UK conurbation. Ryanair, Sabena and Airtours have all demonstrated that when a comparable service is provided, local punters will choose LBA over MAN. As to why this is, I think people will always choose the cheapest and most convenient option. Ok, the last few miles of road to LBA aren’t fantastic, but for a couple of million people the airport is a £20 taxi ride or a 30min lift with a friend / neighbour away.
Of course, the big problem has always been on the supply side – airlines and tour ops much prefer to service this demand from MAN. Whatever is said about LBA w/x, RWY length etc, I think this is primarily driven by economics and for most it is cheaper per head to fly Yorks passengers from MAN based a/c than it is from satellite stations at LBA or HUY (or indeed FY when it gets up & running). That said, Airtours have made a real go of it and are expanding their LBA programme for next summer yet again. However it needs a similar level of support from JMC, First Choice and Thomsons to fully redress the balance.
Of course, the big problem has always been on the supply side – airlines and tour ops much prefer to service this demand from MAN. Whatever is said about LBA w/x, RWY length etc, I think this is primarily driven by economics and for most it is cheaper per head to fly Yorks passengers from MAN based a/c than it is from satellite stations at LBA or HUY (or indeed FY when it gets up & running). That said, Airtours have made a real go of it and are expanding their LBA programme for next summer yet again. However it needs a similar level of support from JMC, First Choice and Thomsons to fully redress the balance.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Leeds
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, I've heard the same. I think it is the latest move in a long running game of cat & mouse between the airline and the management. Don't know the exact details, but when FR's contract came up renegotiation recently I think its fair to say there was some "difficulty" in agreeing a new tariff. FR have since gone through a series of measures to demonstrate to LBA that "you need us more than we need you". These have included axeing flights this summer and limiting the availability of discount fares. The further reduction this winter (or possible withdrawal) seems to be an extension of these tactics. All typical of FR with the exception of it not being fought out in public, for reasons I don't really understand.
No doubt LBA wil hoping that BA can improve on their J41 service this winter to mop up some of these ex-FR pax.
No doubt LBA wil hoping that BA can improve on their J41 service this winter to mop up some of these ex-FR pax.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
682ft AMSL
They, Ryanair, also mess around with times and frequencies on their route LPL to DUB.
Maybe its to keep its pax throughput, and also its market share, up on its MAN route?
They, Ryanair, also mess around with times and frequencies on their route LPL to DUB.
Maybe its to keep its pax throughput, and also its market share, up on its MAN route?
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this the same Ryanair that went from 5 daily MAN-DUB to 2 daily MAN-DUB and said that they would add flights at LPL and LBA instead, only to find that the drop in MAN passenger numbers was greater than the increase on the LPL and LBA routes?
That measure was in response to the "high MAN charges". They are now back up to 4 daily.
That measure was in response to the "high MAN charges". They are now back up to 4 daily.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its the same Ryanair that went from 5 daily flights down to 2 daily flights (so protecting its valuable morning and evening slots) on the DUB to MAN route.
Its also the same Ryanair that was "attracted" back to fly from MAN under that airports special fee package/promotion that went under the name of "New and Under Utilised Routes".
Its also the same Ryanair that was "attracted" back to fly from MAN under that airports special fee package/promotion that went under the name of "New and Under Utilised Routes".
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Near Stalyvegas
Age: 78
Posts: 2,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an ATSA at MAN/EGCC I am following this thread with interest
Fact 1 The "bucket and spade brigade" will fill an aeroplane from X.
Fact 2 The same B & S will "quite probably" fill more than one, but less than ???.
Fact 3 XYZ airlines has 5 a/c.
Fact 4 Tour company/Holiday agent/Ceefax whatever fills 4 a/c from somewhere else. BUT can guarantee 55% load from X
Fact 5 I failed maths, BUT....
"Premium" routes, AKA Schedules
Fact 1 LBA/EGNM has NOT got the catchment that they think.
E.G. York. A big city. Do you fly from Leeds, or Tees-Side. Anything to the West of Leeds, it is in fact easier to go to Manchester
Fact 2 The "weather" at Leeds leaves a lot to be desired
I stand to be corrected/castigated/or just slagged
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
Fact 1 The "bucket and spade brigade" will fill an aeroplane from X.
Fact 2 The same B & S will "quite probably" fill more than one, but less than ???.
Fact 3 XYZ airlines has 5 a/c.
Fact 4 Tour company/Holiday agent/Ceefax whatever fills 4 a/c from somewhere else. BUT can guarantee 55% load from X
Fact 5 I failed maths, BUT....
"Premium" routes, AKA Schedules
Fact 1 LBA/EGNM has NOT got the catchment that they think.
E.G. York. A big city. Do you fly from Leeds, or Tees-Side. Anything to the West of Leeds, it is in fact easier to go to Manchester
Fact 2 The "weather" at Leeds leaves a lot to be desired
I stand to be corrected/castigated/or just slagged
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: England
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chiglet raises some interesting points.
Finningly has a lot going for it, the weather factor being a major one.
The weather at Leeds in the winter/spring is often such that they lose traffic, that said I don't think that LBA management will worry too much about scheduled traffic being lost.
The main revenue under threat from their point of view has got to be the IT traffic, once an operator gets a foothold at Finningly they've got to be a more attractive proposition for IT passengers to the east and south of Leeds.
Obviously Humberside are worrying about the whole development, the opening of Finningly is going to destroy everything that they've worked for, (for the little that they've achieved), I understand that most of the operational staff already have lodged their applications with Peel.
As for Manchester, who knows ?
Finningly has a lot going for it, the weather factor being a major one.
The weather at Leeds in the winter/spring is often such that they lose traffic, that said I don't think that LBA management will worry too much about scheduled traffic being lost.
The main revenue under threat from their point of view has got to be the IT traffic, once an operator gets a foothold at Finningly they've got to be a more attractive proposition for IT passengers to the east and south of Leeds.
Obviously Humberside are worrying about the whole development, the opening of Finningly is going to destroy everything that they've worked for, (for the little that they've achieved), I understand that most of the operational staff already have lodged their applications with Peel.
As for Manchester, who knows ?
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if this is true, maybe someone might know something but in the Airtours holiday brocheure, in the back it states that in 2002/3 (not sure can't remember) that flights will be leaving from Finningley.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Leeds
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chiglet is quite right and essentially reiterates the point that economics drive where the bucket & spade brigade fly from in the north. For a variety of reasons, it is generally cheaper per head to fly a punter from MAN than LBA, whether said punter leaves in Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Hull etc.
It not the case however that *if* LBA could find a profitable way of competing with MAN, that there isn't plenty of potential to shoot at. CWL for example, which solely caters for South Wales, handles over 1m charter pax per year. NCL and EMA do 1.4m each. Yet LBA handles only 0.6m and therfore whilst the catchment area may not be as extensive as MAN or BHX, it compares favourably with these other airports and the potential to double its current throughout is obviously there.
As for the "weather", this old chestnut is simply not the issue here. Look at BRS, almost exactly the same as LBA operationaly, yet handles twice as many charter pax and has just persuaded GO to set up camp. LTN, was chosen by EZY as its first base, and before that BY, MON etc. Also, check out bmi deserting the long CAT3 runway at BFS to a 1800m CAT1 strip down at BHD. In all cases, economics, not operational considerations, were the over-riding factors.
If LBA were prepared to offer loss-leading rates to charter airlines, I have no doubt they'd be here. In the case of Finningley, I suspect Peel will be more pro-active than LBA on this front. If they can persuade BY to move a B757 20miles up the road to LPL to fly exactly the same punters it would have done at MAN, they should have no trouble in getting them to stick one into Doncaster when its up and running. I doubt MAN are "running scared" over this prospect,but no doubt there is a liitle nervousness that FY might become very successful on this front.
682
It not the case however that *if* LBA could find a profitable way of competing with MAN, that there isn't plenty of potential to shoot at. CWL for example, which solely caters for South Wales, handles over 1m charter pax per year. NCL and EMA do 1.4m each. Yet LBA handles only 0.6m and therfore whilst the catchment area may not be as extensive as MAN or BHX, it compares favourably with these other airports and the potential to double its current throughout is obviously there.
As for the "weather", this old chestnut is simply not the issue here. Look at BRS, almost exactly the same as LBA operationaly, yet handles twice as many charter pax and has just persuaded GO to set up camp. LTN, was chosen by EZY as its first base, and before that BY, MON etc. Also, check out bmi deserting the long CAT3 runway at BFS to a 1800m CAT1 strip down at BHD. In all cases, economics, not operational considerations, were the over-riding factors.
If LBA were prepared to offer loss-leading rates to charter airlines, I have no doubt they'd be here. In the case of Finningley, I suspect Peel will be more pro-active than LBA on this front. If they can persuade BY to move a B757 20miles up the road to LPL to fly exactly the same punters it would have done at MAN, they should have no trouble in getting them to stick one into Doncaster when its up and running. I doubt MAN are "running scared" over this prospect,but no doubt there is a liitle nervousness that FY might become very successful on this front.
682
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The annual CAA figures for the year 2000 for diversions, they are not split down into the reasons why, state that there were a total 1498 diversions from the intended UK airport for landing.
The top three as follows:
1. Bristol=183
2. Gatwick=154
3. LBA=132
As for catchment areas, LPL's, 38 miles from MAN not 20 miles, is said to have up to six million people who fly from other airports than LPL.
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: dwlpl ]
The top three as follows:
1. Bristol=183
2. Gatwick=154
3. LBA=132
As for catchment areas, LPL's, 38 miles from MAN not 20 miles, is said to have up to six million people who fly from other airports than LPL.
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: dwlpl ]
Good news today, Easyjet have announced their interest in operating Scheduled services from Finningley. Excellent timing the day before the Public Enquiry starts!!!
682 - Thanks very much, info gratefully received and included in our case.
682 - Thanks very much, info gratefully received and included in our case.
