Manchester Airport Forum | NVR July (what bloody Summer...?)

It isn't exactly perfect weather at the moment for July and photographers struggle in our beloved hobby. Please continue Manchester discussions here

Hope you don't mind if I copy my last post on the locked thread onto here.

Quoting world_rep from a previous post:
"As already confirmed by me earlier, SAS is indeed 6 weekly MAN-OSL next summer. Its in GDS as bookable on all days excluding wednesdays"


I saw your original post world_rep but as you put "seem to be increasing" it just struck me you were expressing a slight doubt. No disrespect intended.

For someone like me not in the industry, please can you just clarify what being in GDS means? Does it mean scheduled to operate and bookable, or scheduled to operate but not necessarily bookable yet? Is it always more than just based on slot applications? Apologies if it's a bit of a dumb question but any comments would be appreciated.

Regarding SAS, it's no real surprise if the actual frequencies do vary outside of the football season. Scandinavians are well represented at OT and probably at the Etihad as well.

A GDS stands for Global Distrubution System. Its systems such as Sabre or Amadeus. It is what airlines and travel agents use for flights etc.

Hi again everyone.

Just a quick question before today's pax figures. Does anyone have any concrete info on the likelihood of Qatar operating the B787 into Manchester and any likely start dates.

Today's pax figures.

EY021 212 188
EK021 167 132
QR041 267 205
UA020 137 diverted into Gander ( YQZ ) with an ill elderly lady who subsequently passed away. RIP
AA210 138 160
AA054 148 200
TK1993 125 143
UA100 150 162
EK017 315 236
QR045 183 224
EY021 196
EK019 297
BG016 77 getting off at Man. How many get on at Man. Answers please.

Cheers folks from Jim.

No worries MANDIV, didn't read it properly and it looked like you didn't believe me or something.

I put 'seems', due to LN-KGL initially saying SAS may pull the flight, and the fact there is nothing official from SAS.

Easyjet 8 based aircraft rumour getting stronger.

Aircraft 7 due for Winter, and aircraft 8 for Summer 2013.

Also, to back it up, Munich seems to be going 6 weekly, with slots showing as extra flights on Tuesday and Thursday, using A320 equipment

If I may, below you'll find the hot SAS news of today.
http://airlineroute.net/2012/07/04/sk-sfoewr-s13/
This came as a surprise even for a number of insiders that I would definitely have classified as "need to know" employees. This is the third time SAS introduces CPH-SFO the last years, and twice the route was pulled (2003 and 2007). One month ago they pulled CPH-BEY on the same site, but really interesting is the reason why.
http://airlineroute.net/2012/06/04/sk-cphbey-jan13/
This is a small illustration why I have said the things I did regarding the Saturday flight MAN-OSL.

But this site has not picked up on the extra frequencies yet.

Given the fact CPH-SFO is a surprise, it seems no-one really knows what SAS are doing at the moment......

Anyone know what the problem was with EK18 today? Saw it heading towards Saddleworth an hour or so ago.

Cheers

Not starting a new thread for this.

Going through security T1, 23 June Mrs A. had her bits and pieces in her normal clear plastic bag,which has been used many times. Clear plastic bag that fastens with a press stud.However this time at the x ray machine we fell foul of the women security officer who appeared to have an eastern European accent,after a few words she let it go through the x ray machine. The man on the other side had different ideas and insisted we purchased one of his air tight bags,the operative word here being airtight.l In the end Mrs A bits and pieces were put in airtight bag by the security man,and handed
back to us unsealed, and no charge for the bag.

Who is in the right here, both clear plastic bags, just different ways of fastening them.
A

Hi everyone

Some pax figures from today's flights.

EY015 182 262
EK021 232 237
UA020 135 154
UA100 138 152
AA210 140 179
AA54 183 211
EK017 400
QR045 167
EY021 167
EK019 351

That's it today.

Cheers from Jimsdad

Some great figures for Emirates again.Why are they taking so long to making the A380 double daily especially on the Ek19.

adding a 777 to the morning flight would be a better idea. A 773ER (or even a 773A) would increase seat count and give a substantial upgrade to cargo space.

With QR doing the mail and Etihad Crystal Cargo having always done well out of Manchester, adding in available capacity helps reinforce the importance of MAN being a cargo hub and could even work in our favour for transatlantic widebody service again. Cargo doesn't need to fly direct most of the time. A forwarder sending a pallet JFK-DXB and onwards can easily send it JFK-MAN-DXB if there is available space at the right price and general time.

I was speaking to an EK air stewardess last year (I serve them all the time they come to do their shopping in the supermarket where I work) and she was saying that they were waiting to take delivery of some more 380s before putting any more into MAN and that JNB was at that time their number 1 A380 priority. However, that was approximately a year ago so surely they have taken delivery of some more since then. As Whitehatter says, a 773 in the morning would add both passenger and cargo capacity, so maybe that would be the best option.

Correct me if I am wrong but aren't EK already due to update the morning service to a 773?

Supposed to be changing it to a 773A, so I hear. Whether that happens or not is up to EK planning.

Emirates have started the A332 disposals so that fleet is getting tight. It could instead see a 773ER but as it's a shorter route like LHR is then a 773A could be possible. Seems First Class is no longer a consideration out of Manchester as it sells on the A380.

Replacement of the evening flight by an A380 causes issues as it reduces the amount of usable cargo tonnage if the aircraft is full. Volume becomes restricted by the need to load bag cans. There are some more EK A380s on the line at the moment but other locations and the crack inspections will be slowing things down.

Hi guys

Pax figures from today.

EY015 214 3 hrs late due to tech issue and aircraft eventually being changed.
EK021 233 237
QR041 220 228
UA020 128 158
UA100 124
EK017 453
LX390 162 !! 140 A lot of of transfer pax onto AA Chicago including a soul band whose name I'd not heard of but very friendly guys.
AA210 138 179
AA054 168 213
TK1993 145 143
QR045 217
EY021 258

I had to end my shift early today so missing numbers due to that.

Cheers from Jim

I don't think its such an issue for EK, as all 5 LHR flights will soon be A380's and obviously that means cargo is severely reduced.

EK are up to something at MAN for 2013 however.

The EK23/24 had been loaded into the ACL system, along with a daily EK99** number (exact number eludes me as didn't have time to copy and paste).

The EK99** number was for a B77F/B74F flight, and the thing Ive noticed with Emirates as opposed to many other airlines, is that they only upload slots once they have the intent to use.

For the freight flit to be loaded, this means that there are 2 things happening:

EK19/20 to be up gauged to an A380,

And/or:

The deficit in cargo space by using 7 daily A380's to the UK means that MAN will be the beneficiary of a dedicated cargo flight for the whole of the UK.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

In other slot news, I saw Austrian had applied for 14 weekly slots (7 in 7 out), wonder how many times they will apply for them before they actually use them. Must be the airline with the highest rate of slot requests without using the bloomin things!!

Also, easyjet have applied for another 148 weekly slots for S13, thats 74 extra weekly flights!!!!!

Does anyone remember how long Austrian actually operated to MAN? If memory serves correctly, wasn't it a night stopper - late evening arrival, early morning departure, sometime in the 90's perhaps?

As for easyjet's extra slot applications, it seems they want to keep an many options open, and as much flexibility with schedules, as possible.

Also, thanks for the info. re EK world_rep.

OS did a DC-9 on a regular basis before the MD80s as well. They have been here on and off for a long time now. It seemed they were a bit like Inex Adria and didn't clean the tails very often (APU smoke, like the Fokker 100s get as well).

Vienna is a tough route because it's so expensive to operate. VIE have high charges which is why a lot of tourists have used Bratislava as an alternative. Maybe the Dash 8 would be a better option as it's lighter and not uncomfortable for a prop.

Emirates Sky Cargo would not be the biggest surprise to me. I posted the following in 2008 and most of it has happened as told, give or take a few years delay (probably due to the Global economic crisis):

http://www.plane-mad.com/forums/manchester/man1426-emirates-news.html

EK start 777 ops on the morning flight on august 1st At least i think thats the date they gave me..... Sooo tired after a weekend at Fairford cant properly remember!!

Steve, any news in Olympic Charters as yet?

Won't affect us much at all. MON are actively sourcing extra aircraft to cover expansion at EMA, LBA and BHX to cover BMIBaby's impending closedown and the new base.

The LBA operation goes up against Jet2 and Ryanair. To be honest I can't see them lasting beyond 2013 at LBA as it's a tough market. If anything MON are going after new business which is going to be created by the continued collapse of TCX and its numbers.

Additionally, it's a sight easier for lots of people in the Yorkshire area to get to MAN than it is to LBA. Location really does work against LBA. Monarch being at LBA won't cause MAN any undue problems. This is just a realignment exercise and Monarch are responding to market opportunities to grow, not move away from Manchester in any way.

Thanks for your comments whitehatter. I'm sure you're right about location - even Leeds enthusiasts admit it's not the easiest place to get to.

As to TCX, as far as I know they haven't all that many flights into LBA, but their operation at MAN is significantly reduced as we know from the charter stats. I suppose a slight concern is that some of that lost TCX business may find its way to LBA although I would have thought MON flights are for a rather different market. And the other side of the coin of course, as you suggest, is that on some routes they will be up against Jet2 and Ryanair from Leeds.

Hi everyone some more pax figures from my shift today.

EY015 250 255
EK021 206 270
UA020 144 159
SQ328 154 174
UA100 108 153
AA210 152 171
AA054 187 219
TK1993 134 136
EK017 391
EY021 248
QR045 211
EK019 309

Looks pretty good and pretty vibrant numbers and presumably good load factors as well.

Cheers folks from Jim

Been off work for about 10 days now...... back in tomorrow..... sooo i may have news tomorrow night!!

Monarch have their own attached holiday brands so are well placed to take up any slack from TCX struggling. Cosmos is probably the best known.

TCX had the Airtours and Aspro brands in their pot, both known for value. Jet2holidays is growing like the clappers and Cosmos are an old, reliable brand so TCX and their less than stable offerings don't look that favourable any more to the punter. Another huge new operator is Lowcostholidays who book Monarch, Jet2 and Easyjet seats so the trend is away from knackered old TCX and towards alternatives.

There is an increasing trend towards combining lowcost seats with cheap bespoke holidays and it's a fast growing sector. Thomas Cook just can't survive in this new internet travel age. I hope Monarch do well at Leeds (I have my doubts though) and grow the market rather than dilute share elsewhere, as TOM have certainly not diluted share by operating out of Doncaster.

Hi again guys

Pax figures from today my last until a week on Thursday.

EY015 244 258
EK021 158 261
UA020 163 161
SQ328 135 180
UA100 126 163
AA210 146 167
AA54 186 203
EK017 482
EY021 197
QR045 189
EK019 338

Cheers everyone look good figures to me.

Jimsdad

NOW THAT IS SPOOKY WORLD_REP!!!

See my post in the Newcastle forum

Seem to remember a post some months ago regarding "Olympic Charters" saying that Air China were proposing flying into us sometime in July with their Athletes onboard......Is this still the case????

Not they came via LHR in the end.

Surprise, Surprise!!!

There should be a new route to the USA announced either back end of this year, or early next year.

AA have just been offered $225,000 by the Florida tourist board to start a MIA-MAN route, to which AA are looking into very closely.

Added to this, Its been rumoured there will be 5 new TATL flights by AA next year.

ORD-BCN B767-300
BOS-BCN B757-200
MIA-MAN B767-300
ORD-BER B767-300
JFK-BER B757-200

Are all rumoured for a S13 start.

Watch this space.

Is the demand estimated to be high, would of thought they'd start with a 757 to see what demand is like

MIA is all about Cruises (not Tom) and depends on how many seats the cruise companies pre-book. Will be 2nd or possibly 3rd attempt.

The B767-300 will be needed for distance. B757 can't quite make it, so its B767 or nothing (no way they would use a B777)

Ive heard it will be 5 weekly, and no indication as to whether it will be year round or summer seasonal yet.

Had a feeling it was seasonal during our winter last time they tried it, but could be wrong. The wife and I certainly used it late November / early December one year. About 2/3 full going out but only about 100 on the return I seem to recall. Another attempt would be most welcome!

I think this time, the route will have a few helping hands:

-The $225,000 provided by the Florida tourist board. Yes, the money will run out eventually, but, will help it out during the 'establishing' phase

-BA will actually run a full codeshare on it this time

-Cruise and other tourism contracts

-Connections onto South America (maybe AA will do a better job at marketing them than IB)

Always been seasonal before (we did have 3 AA flights year round, ORD JFK then BOS in summer and MIA in winter). 1st time round it was something like 5 months, 5 weekly. Then it become 3 months and 3 weekly.

The biggest breakthough for the route is that now BA AA have got ATI, there's every incentive for BA to codeshare on the route as it doesn't matter who flies the route, they'll split the revenue; before, BA didn't bother codsharing. It also fell down due to the lack of cruise contracts so that right, get BA on board and throw in the dosh and it could survive a lot longer.

Also slightly newsworthy is that Cathay Pacific A350 order has been transformed from 16 A350-900s and 10 options into 26 A350-1000s. It would be nice to think they would use one for a MAN route but then I believe we should already be having them operate passenger services now with cargo being the cream for the passenger revenues accrued.

i know i am only a spotter but the thing with AA they don't seem to know what to do i am pretty sure the MAN routes are the one of the most profitable routes in the AA systemMe personally i am damn sure they could fill a 777 on the JFK service both buisiness class and economy class instead of using 767,777 like a shuttle service into LHR.I would like to see services to BOS.MIA,SFO,LAX but i can only dream.

Re AA, it would be interesting to know what the load factors have been in business class since the B767 was re-introduced on ORD. How often occupancy of the 30 seats has exceeded the 16 seats available in the 757 and what the average load was in the latter. In other words, are AA & MAN winning back business class pax with the wide bodied a/c?

On a related note, some friends flew MAN-ORD recently with a reservation in Economy booked through a tour company. On enquiry, they were offered an upgrade at £375 ea. one-way, which sounded quite a decent price considering the extra APD, but it got me wondering if the higher APD still applied in that situation. It should do but can anyone confirm that is the case, or is there a loophole?

I sniff a problem here:

http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/346190-mag-steps-up-moves-to-woo-asian-airlines.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NorthWest_12th_Jul_2012_-_Daily_E-mail

So basically, by buying UGM (routes), MAG hopes for a China link.
The problem?

It seems to me MAN is always advertising that a China/Asia route is 'imminent', yet it never seems to happen.

Buy buying UGM, to me, its like saying 'Twinning with PEK airport didn't work, building airport city didn't work, our own meetings didn't work, so we will try this instead.''.

Must be the longest 'imminent' status I have ever seen........

Yeah, this was in the Manchester Evening News the other night (Monday I think).
Must admit I thought exactly the same thing.

MAGs touring Group Commercial Director in Dallas today. That's 2 airports that definitely want a link but no airlines up for it.

quite possibly the most clueless thing too. He needs to look into who owns Peel Airports

Clue one: It ain't Peel and it ain't China. Clue two: Canada

I also want to know how they plan to get the 747-400F under the Barton Bridge on approach to "Manchester City Airport" (or the City of Manchester Airport as it's actually known as)

The only one would have been AA, but with MIA on the horizon, it aint gunna happen (not unless DFW/MAG agree to offset the route for at least 5 years)

Hi, I actually wrote the post and I felt I just wanted to make a few corrections to any false ideas you might have had about it.

Firstly, I don't think China OR Peel own Peel Airports, it's 65% owned by Vancouver Airport Services.

I'm stating that they are using funds from the CIC to pay for expanding the small airport into a larger transport hub. Well, I'm not stating that, they are. I'm just reporting it. It's in the linked video reports.

The title of the article is actually meant to be a joke. I don't think China is really going to flood Europe with iPods cheaply via Barton. That's crazy.

If you read the article you'll note that I do report the "significant expansion and extension" plan to the airport; from the BBC report. But in reality it I think it's more likely to employ the High Speed Rail network as goods transport. Which is why Peel are saying it's "absolutely vital".

As for the significant transport savings; their words not mine. I imagine they think they can run a "cargo only" air facility for less money than running flights out of Manchester / Liverpool. I'm not so convinced.

Oh, and I really don't mind you thinking it funny or unlikely. I just hope you're right!

Funny, you say you've read it. But the article actually says that it's more likely to use rail to transport the goods. Plus the comments are quotes from Peel.... Hmmm.

The reason why Manchester Airport is at Ringway. The council recognised that a long strip of concrete would sink at Barton!

So the aviation draft plan is out.

Apart from 1 or 2 points, it seems overly south-east-centric.

Its strange, they contradict themselves though:

-The South East is chronically congested
Then.....
-We need to use the regions more
To......
-We will provide LGW/LTN/STN with more 5th freedom rights to encourage more air services to those airports.

You couldn't make it up. That Greening is a Prat!! (tempted to swap the P for a T, but Ill refrain)

Plus, the plan seems to be more on how they can limit aviation. From green incentives, noise control and over reliance on the HS2 plan.

Like I say, Greening=prat. Sooner shes gone the better!

Hints on another site that VCE and REK to be launched soon by EZY but not yet confirmed.

I see Thomas Cook have another massive delay on the flight back from Sharm el Sheikh tonight,(TCX2625)should have been due back tonight at 23.25hrs.........next Information Friday 1600 hrs!!!!!.....Anybody know the problem?, G TCBB did the flight this am.

I should have made it clear the enquiry and price quoted was at check-in. If the additional APD is included in the upgrade price, what if the airline offers you a free upgrade? Just curious.

BA/AA do not charge the difference in APD if you are subject to an invol-upgrade.
I think you do have to pay if YOU pay for an upgrade however.

In answer to your earlier question, I think the J cabin usually goes out with an average of 23 booked seats. Obviously some days are lower, but on the flipside some days are full.

In terms of the B767 for winter, Im told its a definite but for some reason the booking engine does not reflect this yet, so should be rectified soon. Winter is when the B767 is actually needed for performance.

Appreciate your comments world_rep. Thanks for the info.

An average of 23 booked seats out of 30 sounds pretty good to me on the B767. Let's hope it is retained for the winter as I imagine most business travellers prefer the wide bodied a/c.

It's a bit disappointing that 5 x weekly extends to 26 May. Hope it's daily thereafter. Similarly 1 Sep. is quite early for the reduction to 5 x weekly, considering the loads have been healthy (better than EWR at times) and the fares are not cheap judging by the web site.

Do we know if the New York reduces in the winter at all?

I'm afraid that the MAN timetable is unreliable and has been for some time. That's not to say it's wrong about EWR but I'll check with the UA web site.

Qatar

There's a rumour on a.net that QR will be joining One World with an announcement in September.
Only a rumour, but if true I wonder if that would be good, bad or indifferent news for MAN.

I think it would be good with AA upgrading ORD it would be a good One World presence at MAN.

From a quick search it looks as if EWR is daily in November and January so that's good news if true.
Not sure what AA are doing to JFK so might check that later on their web site.

Some discussion on another site of FR reducing its commitment to MAN down to 2 A/C for winter. Does anyone know if there is any truth in this. Also, does anyone know anymore about whether the MAD flights are coming back. It would be dissappointing to loose them. Hopefully the same thing won't happen to VCE if rumoursa of EZY jumping on it are true with LS and MON already on it. This airline business is hell of a fickle one I must say. At least MAN has a variety of operators and good connections to most hubs, but dissapointing all the same to loose key European routes.

Yes, I saw that too. Looking at the schedules, it's probably right, but then FR do park up a lot of a/c in the winter so the other 2 may just be parked here or elsewhere.

If we are to get the 6 a/c based that MOL apparently indicated for next summer, then that would suggest
more routes and frequencies. However, FR are operating a lot of services to MAN from other bases at present (as Vanguard has mentioned previously - over 50 a week I think it was), so it may be that some of those flights will be operated with MAN based a/c.

Hello,

Didn't want too start a new topic off, so thought I'd post it in here.
Could anybody tell me which aircraft will be operating the Monarch MON5642 to Preveza at 7:00am tomorrow morning?

Thanks,
A380-800

Pax figures for today, Sat 14/07/2012:

AA210 140 / 174
EY015 230 / 262
UA020 153 / 164
AA054 159 / 215
SQ328 110 / 155
EK021 153 / 278
VS076 311 / 315
DL064 118 / 207
US734 198 / 266
BRU853 100 / 124 (Belavia's weekly Minsk flight)
UA100 119 / 165
TS244 335 / 321 (Vancouver)
TS256 246 / 230 (Toronto)
SI501 39 / 34
EK017 424 / 517
BA4513 62 (the weekly Cagliari flight, E170)
QR045 208 / 256
TK1993 133 / 124
EY021 258 / 262
JP462 73 / 52 (Adria Airways to Ljubliana, CRJ900)
TP324 75 / 87 (F100)
TU946 85 / 113 (Enfidha, 736)
BG018 80 / 203
EK019 373 / 428

Biman have had very good outbound loads for a while now. MAN-DAC regularly sees 150-200 pax, which on a 400 seat 77W split between MAN and LHR means the aircraft must arrive into DAC with a full load. Glad to see BG succeeding this time around, with the new aircraft and vastly improved punctuality they should do well.

StarMonarA380

BG are doing well in terms of both pax and cargo, as Starmoaner said, looking forward to their JFK flights.

Purely out of interest, does anyone know the name of / who the religious group travelling in / out on the QF are?

Sam

It is the "Exclusive Brethren"

Cheers, Dave ............

Well infomed FR feedback from another site that MAN-MAD not likely to come back. It just seems one of those routes that we just can't keep hold of.

Hopefully MAN are being proactive a talking to MON or Jet2 about re-establishing the MAN-MAD link if it is due to go. If that is the case there may be some learning here that an important potential business/ leisure link has been lost when it has apparently and arguably been capable of attracting 3 carriers at the same time. Maybe there is something in the MAN business model that needs tweaking (e.g. lower fees for routes not operated by another carrier while enuring that differentials are not sufficient to stifle competition if there is sufficient capacity). It seems that the airlines do not or won't work together to coordinate their business so maybe this is somewhere the airport could help out? I stuggle to believe that the airline buiness is that unstable that it can't provide direct services between majour european cities of the significance of Manchester aand Madrid (especially as there is a long established LPL-MAD link down the road). Any thoughts please....

Re. Madrid, what I too find galling is that LPL seems to be retaining it's service with easyjet while MAN has lost all 3 carriers, (unless there is a late change of mind by FR). If there is limited demand, or MAD is going to be more expensive to operate into, why is it LPL that is left to meet what demand there is for the north west market?

You could say the same for Nice which you can only fly to from LPL in the winter and several Polish cities, but the difference is MAD is a major capital city and with the possibility of onward connections.
Not surprisingly, pax figures for LPL-MAD dropped alarmingly over the past year because of the competition at MAN. If easyjet believe they have a better business case for operating this route from LPL, is it because costs there are so much cheaper than MAN?

How about Flybe with their Embraers? They seem to attract a good mix of business and leisure pax, have enhanced their fare structures and have been improving things at MAN with the introduction of the hub operation. They obviously weren't interested back when they got the ex-BACON network, but I'm pretty sure there were noises in the press a few years back saying Madrid (among others) were being looked at. Although most expansion attempts seem to have been centred around domestic / summer French regionals up until this point.

There is demand to Madrid, which is why it's so strange all routes were axed, is there something else we aren't getting?

FR's MAD route was consistently at 160 pax per flight, often having large school groups on it. While I know pax numbers don't mean anything and it's more to do with yield, with FR 160 pax tends to indicate a good profit

I thought there is a problem with costs at MAD and that is why Easy is closing the base

Sorry to go back a bit, but when does Biman begin MAN-JFK?

Yes, that seems to be so, Ian. However, Easy are continuing to fly there from other bases but MAN is one of the bases that has lost out. What we don't know is whether Easy were aware that the other 2 carriers were also pulling the MAN route when Easy made their decision. If they did know, it's a pity, and a bit surprising, that they chose to continue their LPL service and not MAN.

Yesterday's 101 did an aborted take-off - throttle disconnected.

Menzies cutting back, inc, Manchester:-


JOHN MENZIES PLC - UK CARGO RE-STRUCTURE

16 July 2012

Menzies Aviation (Menzies), the aviation services subsidiary of John Menzies
plc, today announces a re-structuring of its UK cargo business.

Menzies will focus its UK cargo business on its London Heathrow operations,
together with smaller operations in Aberdeen and Belfast, and exit its cargo
operations at Glasgow, Birmingham, East Midlands and Manchester airports. This
restructuring, which will result in an exceptional write off of up to £3m, is
expected to be completed by the end of August 2012 and will return the UK cargo
business to profitability.

Thats bad news about Menzies Cargo i know a few of the workers there...... Hope they move to the other handling agents at man and hopefully the rare cargo movements that they handle move too!

Things seem to be changing at MAN across all fronts company wise which is a huge shame for all staff involved. Every company seems to be reducing staff numbers while at the same time we're losing companies like FDS (good for you though Steve), Menzies Cargo and plane-handling (although now dnata, they've downsized quite a bit).

Also big changes from MAG with things like getting rid of the info desks and replacing them with computers, and also downsizing airfield operations and putting dispatchers in charge of marshalling (god help us)

Is my memory failing again or did Jet 2 have a go at MAN-LGW some years ago? If they did, I don't think it lasted long. Or was it some other airline?

Anyway, I agree that a last departure of 16.30 is a joke - I wonder if BA are wanting to chop the route altogether and this is the first step? Mind you, I'm not sure there's enough traffic to support a competitor, especially with the improved train services - notwithstanding having to travel between Euston and areas to the south.

Just found this on avherald.com. United Airlines from Washington to LHR diverted to St Johns due to engine problem. The thing that is interesting is the passenger number - only 50 passengers on this flight.

Nice to see that IAD-MAN has a higher passenger load than IAD-LHR

http://avherald.com/h?article=452c4069&opt=0

MANDIV

Yes, Jet2 operated MAN-LGW quite a few years back, I used it a few times for work related visits to LGW.
Always on time when I flew and quite a few people on board but depends what the yields were !!

Dave................

TCX - Summer 2013

A poster on pprune has come up with possible numbers of a/c at the various bases, although he stresses it's early days but that it fits with the flight program as presently loaded. It may not take account of any a/c being leased in for flights not yet loaded.

Anyway, he reckons MAN will be down to 6 based a/c from 9 this summer (13 in 2011?); among others, BHX has 2 based, down from 3. LGW on the other hand seems to retain it's 6 based a/c with A320s replacing some B757s.

How accurate this proves to be we'll have to wait and see. If, and I stress IF, it does turn out like this, there will be significant further charter capacity lost at MAN unless the gap is partially filled by TOM or others. Those rumoured 8 based easyjet and 6 ryanair a/c may well be needed if the modes of booking holidays and short breaks is continuing to change.

The service is currently 21 weekly, so not sure how this is a reduction but looking at the winter schedule, the proposed nightstopper only operates on certain days so maybe this is a reduction on what was originally planned.

Aeroflot looking at a March 2013 start, along with DUB. Should be announced soon.

BA might just be adjusting various things. I've had an email advising my flight BA2904 dep LGW 10:40 to MAN on 20/01/13 is cancelled and i'm moved to BA 2906 dep LGW 11:20.

The BA winter schedule for the MAN-LHR flights has now been released with the Ex BMI flights now integrated with the existing BA flights and have also been assigned new flight numbers in the 13XX series. Intrestingly, the ex-BMI flights are priced about £200 more than the existing BA flights. Obviously to discourage bookings which makes it easier for BA to cancel the flights as required, in other words, they're simply slot fillers for the time being.

Looks like my whining reached the right places. I did think the guy I ranted at looked personally hurt when I claimed "Gatwick's rubbish for business flights".

W12 schedule (MF)
0645, 0750, 1000, 1740 ex LGW
0640, 0820, 1635, 1915 ex MAN

That's interesting; it looks as if the 17.40 ex LGW is a night-stopper to do the 06.40 ex MAN, it suggests the 07.50 from LGW only returns from MAN at 16.35 and the 10.00 returns at 19.15. Are the schedules integrated with LHR flights do you know?

Hmmm its good and Bad news Sam..... Good news is were getting all (or most) of the work back but the bad news is were struggling to cope and we were also very close to stopping airside work its very difficult to make it work at the moment! Are you despatching the Korean on Thursday mate?

steve

I know I'm moving off topic a bit; but I saw terminal 3 arrivals being debated here a few months back. I landed at MAN tonight of the Air France 1168 flight with my friend... and heard groans of "Oh god; this is ridiculous" infront of me to find at least 600 people in a queue (3/4 flights of Ryanair and my flight which looked full to the rafters... on an A321 that's nearly 200 people). The situation was utterly ridiculous, people were trying to push in and absolutely no one was there to help anyone; including myself and my companion who missed our train thanks to this and would have had to pay £65 to get home due to MAN's lack of organisation.

The situation is ludicrous and NEEDS to be sorted as quickly as possible. Ruined a perfectly good flight for me. The good news is I managed to finally capture EI-DCL in full dreamliner livery for a good half hour stood right infront of me; and she looked absolutely splendid.

Sadly, I think you're going to have to put up with it from now on! Until the UKBA (Government that is, not Manchester Airport itself) provide more staff, or more efficiently currently handle their current staff there's nothing the airport can do about it. While it may badly reflect upon MAPLC, it's out of their hands.

Thanks for the info. Fingers crossed it happens this time. Incidentally, do I assume that would be separate flights to MAN & DUB, rather than a joint service?

With regards to T3: As a weekly KLM user it is bizarre to see the difference between T3 and T2/T1. The whole state of the terminal is very shabby, but also the preparedness of the UKBA is dodgy.
With all the international flights that have been added to T3 (Ryanair; Flybe; AA; AirFrance; KLM) it is very strange that this particular terminal is so behind in facilities and capacity compared to T1 and T2. There are not even e-gates which would be a fairly straightforward first step to deal with the problem. Are there no concrete plans whatsoever to do something about it from either UKBA and/or MAG?

People are forgetting that T3 was not designed for the operation it now performs. T3 was designed around the needs of the the then tennant BA whose operation was mainly regional jets/low config 737's and a few ATP's and hence, the border control facility was more than suitable. Now we have fully loaded 189 seater RYR's all arriving at once causing massive congestion and is not the fault of the UKBA as all desk are manned during arrival time, the problem is, there just isn't enough of them nor is there any room to put more desks in.

in response to post 107 by wythy:

that might be the case but you would hope an airport does a bit of forward planning when they move internationally operating airlines from one terminal to the other. T2 has gone through a significant upgauge over the past few years but there doesn't seem to be anything in the pipe for T3. And I can assure you that not all the desks of the UKBA are manned during arrival time. On the contrary!

I know that us frequent flyers are often sneered at by those 'in the industry' but I'll add my own views on T3 to those expressed above by Hullspotter and Le Cure.

It really is not good enough on MAPLC's part, nor that simple to pass off the extremely poor passenger experience as 'nothing to do with us - it's all the UKBA's fault'.

The approach to the Passport Control area is from either side of the pier into a tiny space that might be more suitable for somewhere the size Blackpool Airport and it gets totally overwhelmed even by one full flight. Queues build up from both sides of the pier and passengers jostle and push to get ahead of the queue.
It was not UKBA that designed this space it was MAPLC, it was not UKBA but MAPLC that decided in its warped wisdom to transfer full service carriers over to a facility where 'full service' disappears as soon as you step off the aircraft.

There are (I think) only 5 desks in this narrow space, one of which is permanently used for non EU. Often these are fully manned, but are overwhelmed by numbers, so there's no point in blaming UKBA on this point either.

Clearly MAPLC does try to attract/retain its premium / frequent flyers as shown by the often very good departure experience (Fast Track etc). Frankly the arrival experience at T3 is dire.
I do now think very carefully before booking a flight that would arrive internationally into T3 as I don't want another 30-45 mins added to my journey time through poor infrastructure.

I presume there were enough passengers at LHR to reach capacity for the return journey otherwise whats the point?

To be fair to the airport, it was the airlines themselves that requested a move from T2 to T3 - RYR due to shorter taxing distances, (do you think they're bothered about the queues at Immigration), Air France to be with their partner Flybe operating to CDG and KLM to be with their sister airline.

That's a very valid point - but passengers (airport and airline customers) don't normally know that. Whereas I am (mostly) happy with the service of the airline, in this case KLM, I am not at all happy with the terminal (T3) as it is not up to scratch (whether you're a frequent flyer or an occassional user)

That the airport needs some time in adjusting to the moves - fair enough - but there is no progress whatsoever in improving the passenger experience. Not even in small scale improvements. In all honesty - you should hear the ranting of arriving passengers. The wait for immigration is sometimes as long as the actual duration of the flight itself. It would be so much better if the airport shows some recognition of that and communicates with its customers what they have in mind to improve it, it's such a no-brainer in my point of view.

The Moscow operator is just to replace BD who were the second UK carrier in the bilateral.

Please continue in the new thread