Pull out from Manchester

I have often viewed VS as missing out on a super opportunity by not developing manchester into a proper hub. But with other carriers fianlly realising Manchesters potenital surely its time for VS to act? They should either invest or pull out- it has been said here before that big things are planned for MAN but Im still waiting hehe! Whilst a/c ops is a problem for MAN- current carriers use the 763 surely a 343 could be full on MAN routes? A quick look at long haul routes shows that VS now face an ever increasing competition on potentail MAN routes- maybe its time to cut our lossses and invest on new routes/destinations from LHR and LGW (slots availablity taken into account). I say this because I believe VS need to act fast in order not to miss the boat! What do you all think?

Current Long Haul Ops from MAN (Sch)
JFK (BA 763) codeshare with AA
BOS (AA 763) codeshare with BA
EWR (CO 763/777) Codeshare with NW/KLM/DL???
MIA (AA 763) codeshare with AA
LAS (BD 330) codeshare with UA
SIN (SQ 777) codeshare with VS
KUL (MH 744)
BGI (BWIA 340)
DXB (EK 773 and 330 twice daily)
Toronto (AC/BD 330/763)codeshare with UA/AC
ATL (DL 777) codeshare with skyteam incl CO/NW/KLM??
IAD (BD 330)- these op codeshare with UA/US
ORD (BD 330)- codeshare with UA/US + other *a
Philadelphia (US 330) codeshare with UA/BD/AC and other *a
BGI (BD 330)
ANU (BD 330)
UVF (BD 330)
Doha (Qatar 330/343)
The 3 Pakistan routes (777/744)

CX are also interested in MAN-HKG

Will,
I notice by your profile your in Oxford..
I'm sure those who live further north are happy that MAN is expanding.
When I lived in the midlands I found both BHX and MAN useful alternatives to london hubs.

Since VS cant operate many more Atlantic flights from LHR and LGW seems to be increasingly short haul, expansion from other airports is likely. VS have not expanded MAN historically because of equipment/market conditions; with new planes on order and other carriers proving the viability of MAN I can see VS expanding here in the future.

Jonathon living in Oxford doesnt mean i dont use MAN- have flown out of MAN 3 times in the last 2 years to international destinations- my point was that it seems a bit of a waste having only the 1 flight from MAN when international routes from the airport clearly work.I think you may have missed my point- i was saying that VS- who quite often like to be first to operate a service, PVG + PHC spring to mind have been very slow on jumping onto the band waggon with regards to MAN. I also feel that VS have really neglected this service over recent years (although may change with 744's being used!) and just highlights there lack of enthusiasm to operate from MAN as a 2nd base.

Your comment about availiablity of a/c is taken into aco**** but when you consider that VS operated to ORD from LHR (a service that was hardly ever full) surely couldnt they have opened up a 2nd MAN service using the same a/c. The operation of PHC (and MCO from MAN)also shows that a/c can quite easily be moved from airport to airport if operating on a 3 times weekly service say.

You mention about new aircraft. With the new 346's beign delievered next year being used on new services to Havana and Nassua plus India and increased frequencies on current routes- it will be very hard for proper expansion to begin until the 380 arrives- do you not agree. Isnt LGW just as much B+S as well as short haul european?

[Nottingham Nick]

I agree with willd.

MAN is a greeat airport and, as I have commented before, it beats me how it makes sound economic sense to set up the whole infrastructure and staffing for just the one flight to MCO [:I]

Nick

Hi again,
I lived in Oxford for a few years but must confess I used LHR!!

I personally dont see it as pointless that VS opperate only one route from MAN - whilst its not much it does serve as a presence..

It also enables VH to sell more 'up north' than they might without a MAN-MCO route

Looking at your first post (in this thread) most airlines (with notable exception of BD) fly one or two routes from MAN

I agree that MAN is a distant cousin in terms of a/c and routing when compared to London hubs, but this will change with the removal of the 742's

LGW is unfortunately (in my opinion) changing to a B&S airport, its a shame really as its far easier to get around than LHR!

VS used to operate a Newark plane from here but thats gone as has Miami..I dont think PHC is B&S - but this was swapped for MIA.

Southern airspace is getting crowded (and LHR expensive), its cheaper to operate from MAN/BHX

It'll be interesting to see what airports (other than LHR) will be able to handle the A380! I saw on discovery that even LAX has doubts that changes to road bridges etc wont have to be made.

Virgin have big expansion plans how much MAN fits into them remains to be seen.

Who knows if VS ever merge with BD MAN will be a big VS/BD Hub!!

Hi again!

I would argue that if LHR is getting crowded that STN will be the next major airport for sch expansion- VS have publically said they do have a 3rd airport in the london region that they are more than happy to operate from as LHR and LGW get more congested.

Whilst BD's expansion it could be argueed is b/c they cant get into LHR- i just feel that VS really could do more here. They could have at least started caribbean operations. Rumours are flying that LAX will be the next international destination, wouldnt it be great to see VS operating it- somehow i doubt it. When you consider that VS already have crew and ground handling in 5 of BD's current routes it wouldnt have taken much to have operated these themselves- especailly a route like LAS which will be only flying thrice weekly.

I dont see how having a UCS 744 will change VS operations that much after all MCO is hardly a business route is it- the majority of pax wont realise what is ahead of them in PE and UC although it will stop the tech issues with the 742. If VH is the reason for MAN-MCO, which i would imagine it would be, then why havent we seen MAN-LAS and MAN-BGI etc. It jsut strikes me as a real shame- with the catchement of the whole of the north of england it is a real losse it really is. WOuld have been great to have seen some of the new a/c operating from MAN.

With regards to the A380- it will be very interesting to see for how long LAX holds out with no A380 plans- as has been mentioned on a.net, with VS, QF and SQ having major 380 orders i cant not see LAX allowing all 3 carriers to change to another Californian airport or be able to put up with the pressure from the 3. QF ezpecially, they have up to 10 LAX flights a day!

Hasn't NEMA got one of the longest runways and is BM main hub........

[Nottingham Nick]

quote:Originally posted by AlanA
Hasn't NEMA got one of the longest runways and is BM main hub........

It is certainly a BMI Baby hub, but I always thought that the runway was far too short. I used to do a bit of work there a few years ago and when LHR / BHX etc were fogbound they used to lands 747s there, but they were never allowed to take off again with Pax due to the length of the runway. The pax had to be bussed away.

They have done a LOT of work expanding the terminal recently, and there are big plans for a runway extension, but I believe that these are still bogged down in the public enquiry nightmare.

Now Finningly Airport, near Doncaster, on the other hand.... it has a MASSIVE runway, and I think the railway franchise for the East Coast Mainline may be up for grabs again soon ;)

Nick

Nick,
I have a copy of the Governments paper for tyhe future of aviation Midlands region somewhere, I'll come back....
AH! found it.
Infrastructure capacity restrictions
BHX Runway capacity is estimated to be around 190,000 air transport movements PA, with a runway length of 2605m which allows aircraft of the size of A330's and B767's with full payloads.
EMA Runway capacity estimated at 220,000aircraft movements per annum, with a runway length of 2890, which allows aircraft the size of A300's, A330's and B747-400's to operate at full payloads to most destinations. A further extension to 3080m is currently under consideration by the local Planning Authority
It then goes on to options, including a second close spaced runway would still mean BHX will reach capacity by 2020, A wide space option (longer second runway) would give capacity through 2030.There is also talk of the option of a second wide space runway at EMA.
Finally it shows potential route networks, showing EMA handling N East USA & Canada and SE USA from 2015 and BHX mid & west coat from 2015 plus OZceana from 2030.

Hi all,

I live in Manchester and I am very interested in the current expansion that has been taking place over the last couple of years at Manchester (second runway, term 3 etc.)

With regards to the A380, there are various factors that have to be looked at in order for the 380 to operate out of a particular airport such as runway length and width, taxiway width and clearances, taxiway loadings and ground equipment. Plus the all important emergency services provision.

The interesting part of this is that presently Airbus are quoting seat/mile costs for the standard config A380 to be LESS than a current 747-400!!. A Low seat mile cost is the holy grail of charter operations, and basicly means the cost per seat per mile to operate the aircraft. This means that even at the airbus standard config, the A380 is a very attractive proposition for the current Florida routes where there are currently around 4 747-200s per day operating out of Manchester plus A330's and B767's (and even a DC-10!!)

If the airlines/airbus manage to pass the aircraft for a higher number of passengers in say an economy only config, (passengers must be able to evacuate in 90 seconds) then I am sure that all the charter operators like My Travel (if they are still around!) and Monarch, who already have an A330 rated pilot base will be running cash in hand to the airbus door!!

Just my 2 cents worth.

Neil.

couldn't VS add more codeshares with BD on there long haul MAN routes. Its funny on virgin radio listening to there adverts for viv virgin las vegas thanks to the beautiful BMI lol.

Yes the BD codeshare would be a good idea but number of thoughts about that:

1. Would VS be willing to sell UC tickets for a below UC par service? I guess the prices would be made cheaper than UCS prices- although BD wont want the price to undercut there price.

2. What would BD get in return for the codeshare?

3. A BD codeshare that close remember your saying VS numbers on routes to LAX, YYZ, BGI, IAD, ORD, UVF and ANU would perhaps be too close for both carriers. It would spark rumours of a merger something that BD has been clear to establish that wont happen and also it will spark *a rumours something that VS insist wont happen!

[Nottingham Nick]

Alan

I stand corrected about NEMA - a lot more has changed since I spent some time there [:I]

Any expansion would be nice, as it is my local airport, but I the lack of a rail link will still hurt it.

Nick