Manchester Airport Forum | NVR Sept 2012

The LHR news is not unexpected given the "herd" mentality of our MPs who actually do not have a clue about what they are actually supporting , that said not sure it would affect Manchester in the short term even if it went ahead.

...By the time it's operational demand will have far outstripped its limited capacity anyway.

I always thought the main problem in the London TMA was airspace not runways, so unless there is a radical change in ATC technology or they reduce slots elsewhere it aint going to make a lot of difference.

I hate to suggest it but what they really need down there is a 4 runway system in one place and closure of LTN LGW and STN to avoid conflicts over the Capital but it isnt going to happen, too many vested interests at the other locations with competing sets of customers !

I think I would be more worried about MAG potentially buying STN, and the loss of direct investment at Manchester. If MAG just becomes a money making landlord with no regard for the location of its assets where does that leave Manchester, how will decisions be made, suppose an even more London Cetric set of shareholders buy in down the line, would we not end up in a ludicrous situation of MAG, thats "Manchester" Airport Group (lest we forget) , expanding Stansted at the expense of Manchester ?

The Gtr Manchester councils as shareholders used to have a strong voice but seemingly have totally abdicated majority share ownership and responsibilty to such an extent that I am not sure who is actually batting for us anymore.
The board members will have a duty of care to obtain best return on investment, if that is STN then so be it....

And what about flights, as an example if Cathay Cargo wanted more flights into the UK and were to consider the South East and STN how would MAG then promote one airport over the other, surely they would have to be impartial and would be unconcerned because either way they will obtain a shareholder return.

What I find amasing is that when Gil Thompson was at the helm , the airport fought a long portracted battle to ensure Stansted's development was capped, but if MAG do obtain STN what then?

I just think this whole business puts MAG in a totally ambiguous position personally !

Not really. This refers to the amount of Movements per hour MAN could handle. Whether a plane diverts from LHR to us would CATIII not really matter unless MAN was also fogbound and busy.

Only two Mad Dogs appeared in Snowflake colours, LN-ROS and LN-ROU, and both were MD-81 upgraded to MD-82 standard. Both have since April/May 2010 been flying for Allegiant in the US. These two aircraft flew in the US before this short Snowflake stint when they were leased out to Reno Air between 1992 and 1999. With the first SAS Mad Dog arriving Reno, Reno Air got a real problem. They didn't know that SAS had modified their Mad Dogs to glass cockpit and all Reno Air pilots were only qualified for the old classic cockpit. In 1995 SAS got a taste of the same as they leased 9 early MD-81 from Swissair that had the round dial old classic cockpit. The Swissair MDs (SAS called them DC-9-81) stayed in SAS service until the first 737NG started to arrive in 1999-2001.

There are many more stories about the SAS fleet, but I can't reveal them all tonight. One I can tell you is that you will not see the MD87 anymore at MAN. The last of them went out of service earlier this week and the aircraft seems to be heading to the US to be modified to fire tanker.

The UA101 from yesterday fully boarded at about half 10 last night. Only for the air start to fail on the engine and it is now delayed until 4pm this afternoon! To note, today is the first day of non op IAD. From now on Wednesday's and Thursday just have the EWR. Later on in winter the IAD also drops from Tuesday leaving it at 4 weekly till next spring.

I don`t think that is correct TOM787 as it shows on Unuited website as operating Tuesday in November
and also on Manchester airport site

Looking to be booked on this flight on April 2nd (2 days after the route opening?); but every time I try it says "Sorry, you have selected an invalid route." Hope this is a computing error and not Branson during a U-Turn.

....amazing looks like RW3 ruled out at LHR for time being, if its going spare can we have it up here please

Re SAUDI its purely an invitation document released FROM the UBM Aviation Manchester Office who run Routes Online".

Bit misleading but its nothing to do with Manchester as such.

Ronaldsway could apply if it wanted !

But this might be of much more interest...

http://www.therouteshop.com/manchester-airport/?utm_source=anna.aero

I don't doubt LHR needs more capacity but personally I'm disappointed in our national airline not utilising arguably the busiest regional outside the capital.

Looking at the longer services we had in the 70's surely they could have made one or two of them work now if they tried, particularly to America, if the other airlines can do it BA should too particularly considering the numbers to have to fly, drive, coach or train it down to LHR to get a connection.

I accept France and Germany may be larger economies but as well as AFR/DLH I believe you can fly long range from Milan and Barcelona with AZA and IBE.

For us when we go we don't give a toss whether we would fly AFR from Paris, Toulouse, Marseilles, Lyon or Lufti from Frankfurt, Hamburg, 'dorf or Munich if available, the absolute last resort for us is Heathrow.

Sorry but some of the comments are more out of touch than our policy makers !

I'm not sure anybody is suggesting they don't need extra capacity in the South East, it's just the Kack-handed shambolic piecemeal way it's being done !

MPs as I suggested in a previous post are herd like, masters of the sound-bite , they make decisions for themselves not for the greater good of the people. NOTE - that is neither a left or right wing view BTW.

Whatever the merits of RW3 (OR a new 4 Runway airport as I have actually advocated previously), the whole issue has been kicked into the long grass in the space of three days, it will not report its findings until after the next election, that just about sums up our politicians.

More Fudge than Thornton's ! So much for the so called "Decision Makers" that some of us put our faith in !

Some seem to think "Us Upt North" are all full time apparatchiks in The Socialist Republic Of Mancunia, this is complete bollocksology, But if you don't think this country IS LondonCentric you are deluding yourself.

When this report does come out Manchester will be lucky if it gets more than a passing mention. We will be tucked away in a paragraph near the index.

As for other siren voices in the industry, demanding expansion their remit is based naturally on pure profit. Can you run airport policy based purely on that motive, I suspect not !

With respect to airlines starting and then pulling out, how about we had a level playing field, never mind halving APD how about airlines charging the same fares out of Manchester as they do London? Over the time line that has been mentioned it was not uncommon for a mark up of 25%-30% on a ticket Ex Manchester !

I don't want passengers bound for London forced into Manchester or God forbid Birmingham but lets at least have a structure that supports our own market. In Germany they took the view that a significant % of GDP / Population etc was within a 2 hour drive of Munich, they could have developed Frankfurt to death but the German Government took a holistic view of the whole of the country, (as indeed did Lufthansa). Size of country was imaterial !

Result - new airport at Munich now turning 37M pax a year, an airport with considerable long haul connections serving and supporting a very specific and exceptional area of the country with significant GDP !

One other point, there is nothing to stop an aggressive shareholder buying into MAG to use it as a vehicle to buy Stansted OR indeed another airport, but that totally devalues the main driver to what MAG once was, and would be a clear conflict of interest in that regard if they purchased an airport which was in competition with Manchester.

So forget commitment and sentimentality to Manchester. Shareholder profits will prevail "wherever" they originate.

Re awkward questions. How about awkward answers, 24M pax that connect thru LHR fly in and out, due to the nature of the route (intnl to intnl) they do not even pay APD so they are not even funding any or part of any additional construction. Most of the growth at LHR in recent years has actually come from precisely this segment ! Additional capacity would actually assist this sector not the inward London market.

MAN airport profile is now on therouteshop.com

good starting point to show MAN's most desired routes and how many pax they think used connections to get there.

The only issue with the profile, is that the contact is an 'Aiden Mooney'. His picture is there, but posing with Michael O'Leary. Is that not sending out he wrong message to airlines that you are very cosy with a well know formidable force in EU aviation?

Looking at postings on another site relating to our neighbour but competitor airport, LPL and contemplating if there are any implications for MAN:

Ryanair are re-introducing flights from LPL to both Rygge (2 x weekly) and Oslo Torp (4 x weekly) this winter, the latter on the same days as MAN-RYGGE. Does anyone know if these are flights which operated last winter or are they returning after a longer gap? One for LN-KGL perhaps.

One poster suggested that EZY are to announce new flights from LPL next year of the longer haul type. Of course, if they are keeping to their statement that the LPL base is unlikely to increase back to more than 7 units, then even if the new routes happen it would probably mean some other routes reducing in frequency or being dropped altogether.

Just to add on Easyjet, their guy on pprune has said that according to his commercial manager, Zurich is definitely not coming back to MAN. Hope they are looking at some of those unserved cities on the Routes Shop that have business potential!

Finally, any further developments re Wizzair starting at MAN? My impression was that it was more than just a rumour or speculation because they were dropping some routes at LPL & DSA. Is this still the case or is the story cooling?

As you say WH Economic strategy and political will don't go hand in hand...... I despair !

Interestingly I'm just looking at Munich !

Catchment area 1 hour to 2 hours is showing at 6.97m pax

Is that correct as it seems somewhat light compared to the 24m quoted by Manchester.

Whilst the purchasing power of the NWest may not compare to Bavaria, that must be a significant marker?

Incidently I think Manchester could learn from the Munich site! As was said we should have correct points of contact AND some polished profile images, not sure a beaming Micheal O Leary peering over the shoulder of a senior exec is the best message !

I think they could also define "leakeage" and MIDT !

Also no reference to Airport City Or World logistics hub, seems a glaring omission although I appreciate its still very much at planning stage.

Sorry MANDIV, you have to wait for an answer 'till Wednesday. You see I'm in a hotel in Chester now after having flown with the Airbase Dragon Rapide earlier today and enjoyed a evening dinner with good wines at The Red House. Tomorrow will be a MAN day, Monday a Norfolk and Essex day and Tuesday an Amsterdam day.

I see you all discussing new routes for S13, but what about August this year and the 1.8 % growth. This is below what I expected. Without all the spreadsheets here in Cheshire I can now say the 20 million mark have to wait for 2013 and it will also be a very close race with Stockholm-Arlanda to the end of 2012. ARN has lost its momentum and are heading for 19.8-19.9 million passengers or 2012.

You have to include Termanal Pax, otherwise LHR would only be doing 40M !

....30M pax at LHR are all connecting pax, from memory I think its only 6 million which even terminate in the UK , 24M fly onto the EEC, Scandinavia or the Middle East, etc

PS MANDIV i thought the same re leakage, seems inconsistent re criteria for one route over another .

Leakage appears to be a general interpretation of anybody in our catchment area using "any" potential option re a competitor service BUT initially focus seems to be specifically on LHR....to be honest I think they could have done a lot better, it looks as though its been thrown together by somebody with little knowledge of the what the airport is trying to convey.