I wanted to post in the MAN 45 thread, but due to inactivity it's been archived, so I thought I'd start a new thread...

My parents flew on LS875 to FAO this morning and after getting off the phone to them a while ago they told me that they were delayed by over an hour and from what I hear it wasn't a Jet2 aircraft. I understand Jet2 has/had a Strategic A320 (reg LX-STA) on lease based at MAN for the summer. Can someone please confirm whether this was the aircraft on that flight or something else, and if so whether it's allocated to LS875/876 or whether it was stepped up to do that due to the original aircraft going tech?

Thanks!

Today LS875 was operated by EC-ISY according to logs. I assume it is based there on ACMI lease for Jet2, but I don't know for sure I don't live up that neck of the woods.  
View Large View Medium

Photo © Paulo Santos - Aerospray

Its was EC-ISY positioning in from MAD this morning but didnt get to MAN till about 0800am therefore delaying the FAO.

News for next year - TK going to 2 daily and are talking 3 daily thereafter. Current target for the year is 200,000 pax

I'm not sure whether it's too early to ask this but will DL plan to resume JFK-MAN in 2013?

[Edited 2012-06-11 12:44:32]

AF 72 - CDG To LAX diverted in this afternoon (separate thread on it) - anyone know why it came into MAN as it was a long way north when it turned round?

Quoting faddypainter (Reply 1):

Quoting thegregster (Reply 2):

All seems to make sense now - thank you both for the info.    I take it then that the positioning flight from MAD was for it to commence its lease to Jet2 on selected MAN flights?

Quoting Ant72LBA (Reply 5): anyone know why it came into MAN as it was a long way north when it turned round?

Medical diversion. Helps having Wythenshawe Hospital nearby.


MAN pax numbers fell slighly last month - probably due only 1 bank holiday, June's figure may compensate having had a double bank holiday plus what appread to be a delayed half-term holiday for schools going off the lack of traffic last week. The moving annual total figures show roughly 5% growth and not 5% fall as they've published.

May 2012 Provisional stats out:

Main ones:

Brussels -7%
Copenhagen -1%
Helsinki -21%
Paris CDG +4%
Dusseldorf -2%
Frankfurt -17%
Munich -1%
Dublin -7%
Milan MXP +17% Not bad considering FR's entry onto Bergamo
Amsterdam +1%
Lisbon +75%
Barcelona +29%
Madrid +131%
Stockholm +1%
Oslo +76%
Geneva +6%
Zurich -33%
Istanbul +37%
Doha +29%
Abu Dhabi +46%
Dubai -14%
Islamabad -22%
Singapore Flat
Atlanta -1%
Chicago +5%
New York JFK - 31%
Newark -48%
Philadelphia -5%
Gatwick -22%
Heathrow +10%
Aberdeen +34%
Belfast City -13%
Glasgow +5%
Edinburgh -9%
Southampton +6%

As well as starting MAN-ARN, Norwegian will be adding a 4th weekly flight on MAN-OSL from the winter timetable.

Iberia/Air Nostrum ending MAN-MAD services in September.

That has to be IB's final attempt at that route, surely?

also appear to be losiing U2 to MAD as well.

Quoting lisbonbearuk (Reply 11): That has to be IB's final attempt at that route, surely?

Barely advertised so it's not really in the public knowledge. May be better suited for Iberia Express

Surely MAN - MAD would be a route better suited for Flybe E170 with BA/IB codeshare!

Quoting david_itl (Reply 12): also appear to be losiing U2 to MAD as well.

Also not showing with FR past the 2nd November!

Surely MAN can't lose 3 carriers on the same route?

Quite why MAN didn't try to advise that if all 3 services ran at the same time at the same time of day then no-one would be happy I don't understand. There are appears to be enough of a market there for 1 airline to make go of it. Heard about the U2 service going a few days ago but when you look at the 1-way prices for MAD and HAM then there's no comparison. MAD prices are a lot higher than the HAM ones so unless they've managed to get a load of walk-on fares and corporate business to make the HAM route worthwhile, then i wonder why that route is not going instead. And before anyone says anything, I know that looking at the lead-in prices means nothing to the bean-counters but for a layman, it's a nice indication of how popular a route is.

It may just be that this is just a 'let's see what the competition are planning before we commit' moment. All three must be aware that they're together not particularly viable.

Replacement airline for GOT in place  

Sun Air beginning 5 weekly GOT-MAN from 27th August looking on Amadeus.net. Flight numbers BA8231/8232, arrives 0900 departs 0930

Quoting david_itl (Reply 15): Quite why MAN didn't try to advise that if all 3 services ran at the same time at the same time of day then no-one would be happy I don't understand.

Well I don't think it's MAN's place to give such commercial advice! Surely the airlines own marketing and research departments should have to come to this conclusion. I understand IB going for the route due to the IAG/BA link, and I can then understand one LCC trying, but whichever LCC announed the start up second is quite clearly nuts.

Quoting david_itl (Reply 17): Sun Air beginning 5 weekly GOT-MAN from 27th August

Now public on their website as 11 weekly AAR-GOT-MAN

End of the BD code to/from LHR today.

Last arrival of BD from LHR:
BD596 London Heathrow Estimated 23:00

First arrival using the new BA flight number
BA8100 London Heathrow Estimated 08:50


Missed the last BD departure  

First depature in new BA flight number
BA8119 London Heathrow Scheduled 09:50

Finally found something coming out of MAN regarding the forthcoming white paper on Aviation Policy Manchester Evening News article.

Chief Exec Charlie Cornish:

"We have scope to grow and we want Manchester to be seen as the key northern gateway hub. We don't want Manchester to be lost in the discussion and want a level playing field – we have an absolutely key role to play. We want to attract more long-haul passengers and are quite confident we will continue to develop".

What could be a possible help to furter long-haul growth may be a rising of APD for those passengers using LHR/LGW and a reduction for those outside the London area so that there is scope for some claw back of passengers form the regions who are inclined to only think of LHR/LGW for their travel needs, and a better marketing campaign i.e unlike the woeful lack of promotion for the soon-to-be-culled IB service. Perhaps using advertising boards dotted around LHR/LGW may be a start?

Quoting david_itl (Reply 21): "We have scope to grow and we want Manchester to be seen as the key northern gateway hub. We don't want Manchester to be lost in the discussion and want a level playing field – we have an absolutely key role to play. We want to attract more long-haul passengers and are quite confident we will continue to develop".

Agree absolutely, MAN is not jusy another airport, it is a massively strategic piece of infrastructure that does well but could do better of treated properly. I say that as a firm supporter of LHR as the UK's main hub, recognising that we should have primary and secondary airports, local and strategic if you will. I also don't think differential APD is in any way a good idea as parts of the UK are subsidised quite well enough thank you and it will actually mean EZY and FR being subsidised by minimum wage taxpayers trying to get by in the overpriced South East. Utterly brain dead IMHO.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 22): I say that as a firm supporter of LHR as the UK's main hub, recognising that we should have primary and secondary airports, local and strategic if you will.

Official status of any given airport is an irrelevance. It may well be the South East's main hub, but it certainly isn't to the thousands of Glaswegians transferring at DXB, EWR or AMS. Similarly to those travelling in the other direction.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 22): I also don't think differential APD is in any way a good idea as parts of the UK are subsidised quite well enough thank you

Can you quantify this?

Quote: and it will actually mean EZY and FR being subsidised by minimum wage taxpayers trying to get by in the overpriced South East.

Direct taxation is a subsidy? It's starting to become clear that in a country with such vastly different levels of regional GDP, a ''one size fits all'' taxation system is going to be detrimental to the poorest region's ability to increase their contribution to the national pot, if you like. The gap isn't closing as it was supposed to, it's getting wider.

There's already consideration being given to differing regional pay levels, and also latterly regional benefits levels, so it follows that taxation should also be treated in exactly the same way.

Anything interesting due at MAN this upcoming saturday?

TP MAN-LIS going daily from October 28th.

Even better news, they plan to add more frequencies next summer.

Great success story for a route which has previously had quite chequered performance.

Rgds

Quoting mainMAN (Reply 23): It may well be the South East's main hub, but it certainly isn't to the thousands of Glaswegians transferring at DXB, EWR or AMS. Similarly to those travelling in the other direction.

You would doubtless hope that many from Leeds and Liverpool would use MAN though? There is no "official" status, my main point is that in supporting a UK hub, we keep jobs in the UK and maintain our connectivity. I was trying to make a point about overall strategy versus local politics and you have rather proved my point with your answer.

Quoting mainMAN (Reply 23): Can you quantify this?

We both know there are parts of the country that have very little economic value and survive only on the largesse of New Labours inflated public sector. Parts of Wales, vast parts of the North East and many parts of Scotland are strangers to private sector employment.

Quoting mainMAN (Reply 23): Direct taxation is a subsidy? It's starting to become clear that in a country with such vastly different levels of regional GDP, a ''one size fits all'' taxation system is going to be detrimental to the poorest region's ability to increase their contribution to the national pot, if you like. The gap isn't closing as it was supposed to, it's getting wider. There's already consideration being given to differing regional pay levels, and also latterly regional benefits levels, so it follows that taxation should also be treated in exactly the same way.

Yes it is, in the same way direct taxes from poorest people fund the pensions of many millionaire GPs which are the best paid in Europe after they were given an unasked for pay hike wihtout anything in return, less defensible are my taxes being used to make Ryanair more competitive from say LPL! I understand why Northern Ireland is a special case, however I do not believe it is fair to effectively subsidise foreign airlines at the expense of our own.

It has just been announce that MAN will see an increase in 1 daily flight when then new BA schedule comes into effect in October following on from the BMI merger

Quoting liverpoola380 (Reply 27): It has just been announce that MAN will see an increase in 1 daily flight when then new BA schedule comes into effect in October following on from the BMI merger

Thats actually DECEASE of three slots transferred over the Pennines !

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 26): We both know there are parts of the country that have very little economic value and survive only on the largesse of New Labours inflated public sector. Parts of Wales, vast parts of the North East and many parts of Scotland are strangers to private sector employment.

Skip this is flatly offensive - Engineering and manufacturing (Neither skills ever found in abundance within the M25) are high employers in both the North East and South Wales they operate out of small industrial units through to huge car plants - Nissan (at Washington) in particular produces cars that are Exported in large numbers adding to the economy.
Aero Engine maintenance in South Wales also. Both with a network of local suppliers.

A number of key design , and energy science based works are carried out in Wales and Scotland including making those horrendous white field propellers (the alternative is even more red paint in the trade deficit - an interesting economic indicator completely ignored these days )and major tourist destinations.

North of Watford gap is far from a baron economical waste-land as you well know.

Its true coal and steel have wained however you know what - production has restarted in Tees-side only recently.

As a key component of rebalancing our economical mix these areas with their skill base in design and manufacture need to be primed and not continually undermined by the service and banking sectors.
We NEED BOTH to be strong and that where the policies of last thirty years have gone so wrong.
We need some sort of industrial policy framework -yet these Eaton boys won't bring that about.

Again true that the previous government moved some of the state admin jobs away from London however these didn't need to be based in the capital and as for the Revenue they have LONG operated a remote system from that of your domicile/employment
Agreed streamlining necessary.

As for regional taxation well we already have a framework in place with Scotland having a something like +/-3% varying powers and the Welsh assembly seeking similar powers.

Its good old England that misses out such as Humberside parts of Liverpool and Manchester and yes the East End of London and the only way to prime these areas (Without tax varying powers) is through grants on one type or another.
Yes yours and my tax money plus the national deficit.
Do you think its time for an English Assembly - I do !

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 28): Thats actually DECEASE of three slots transferred over the Pennines !

Is it? remember this is the launch of W12 schedule, so how does it compare to W11 combined BA/BD? That might be more meaningful?

Although for sure LBA slots have come from somewhere as have the extra norwegian slights (3 daily slot pairs) and ICN (6 weekly slot pairs)!!

Quoting mutu (Reply 29): Is it? remember this is the launch of W12 schedule, so how does it compare to W11 combined BA/BD? That might be more meaningful?

Yes combined decrease of three slots on winter 2011/12
That said if all operated with A32x might be still be a capacity rise.

The June stats are out and show a nice increase of 6.68% to over 2 million pax for the month. With the shifting a May bank holiday into June,and small fall in numbers it's opportune to look at the combined figures for May and June: up 2.96%. The moving annual total is just over 19.25 million terminal pax (up 5.29%)

Anyone know the reason for the extended stay of todays EK A388? It was A6-EDD today. It arrived bang on time at 12:24pm but did not leave until after 17:00, which is 3 hours late!

It's reassuring to see such healthy stats for Manchester; a shining star amongst a rather lamentable collection otherwise.

It does beg the question: Has Manchester caught up after initially missing out from the lo-co customer, and has the LPL bubble burst?

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 33): It does beg the question: Has Manchester caught up after initially missing out from the lo-co customer, and has the LPL bubble burst?

Part A - not quite -still 2 million light !
Part B- Yes

Regards

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 33): It does beg the question: Has Manchester caught up after initially missing out from the lo-co customer, and has the LPL bubble burst?

In part that is a fair assumption but you can't discount the fact that MAN has always done well at attracting a wide portfolio of airlines. The only exception in the past has been the Lo-co's and to be honest i don't think MAN desperately needed them. However, they were right to take take advantage of the benefits that the LCC's bring to an airport and I think we all agree that they should have taken advantage of this sooner.

Playing devils advocate though, and a completely different school of thought; did MAN unwittingly make the right decision. i.e was it better to let the LCC's develop at arms length whilst MAN protected the network carriers and charter operators? The carriers then came to MAN to counter the decline of charter and the legacies are in a bit better shape to compete with low cost. Just thinking out loud.

As for LPL. The LCC sector was always going to get saturated and, to an extent, mature and just because LPL was in many ways the pioneer within that market it by no mean means that it is safe. I think LPL will continue to see a fall in passenger numbers, particularly next Summer. The two aircraft that Easyjet will be moving from there this Winter are unlikely to return. The effects of this probably won't be felt until next Summer because the reduced Winter programme always requires less aircraft than what is actually based there anyway.
I think it is a case of LPL having done extremely well in the past, punched above it's weight even, but now things are declining to a more sustainable level. That said, having Ryanair there does mean that a large chunk of passengers could be lost quite easily if LPL doesn't play their game.

[Edited 2012-07-05 11:04:16]

Quoting GT4EZY (Reply 35): Part A - not quite -still 2 million light !

Let's rather say 3.16 million passengers light - the year rolling terminal passenger number was at the end of June 19,283,334 and the all time high in December 2006 was 22,442,855 passengers.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 22): Utterly brain dead IMHO.

A bit like your whole post I'm afraid.

All airlines are free to use the regional airport with the reduced APD if they choose not just FR and EZY it's just they choose not to, it's not the tax man giving FR and EZY subsidies.

It's in everyone's interest that the government supports airlines that use all of the UK's airports, not just one or two.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 26): We both know there are parts of the country that have very little economic value and survive only on the largesse of New Labours inflated public sector.

You're talking about the City of London? Lots and lots of taxpayers money went there, about £992 billion at it's peak; a lot more than the regions have ever got.  

I see EK's DXB-JFK A388 diverted in about 14:30. It was over Southern Norway when it changed course to head for MAN. Anyone got the full story?

Quoting boysteve (Reply 38):

It's a medical diversion. I'm not sure if it's flying out today though. It looked abandoned out on remote, like it was there for a long stay. Maybe crew hours were an issue?

380 A6-EDD has just deprated MAN headed for JFK.

Quoting LuftyMatt (Reply 39): It looked abandoned out on remote

Because the A380 stand was occupied by the DXB flight upon the diversions arrival

Quoting mhodgson (Reply 41): Because the A380 stand was occupied by the DXB flight upon the diversions arrival

I mean it was just on stand on it's own, no ground equipment or vehicles around it.

Couple of 744 interesting passenger movements of note today and tomorrow


GTI8996 arrives today (should be around at 1320) and departs at 0900 to Durban

QF6051 Sydney Scheduled 08:10

Whn is there a QF B744 at MAN?

It was in for maintenance left last week I believe.

QF brought in a religious group - aircraft went to CWL and LYS. It's now back in and should be departing on the 30th.


At the moement we have the Government of Gabon 777 parked up for the duration of the Olympic Games and Atlas Air broguht Man Utd back from Shanghai this morning and is due to depart later tonight.

well it (or another bird) was at MAN at 5pm this afternoon

Here's the religious group that the QF 744 brought in...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_Brethren

LH FRA-DUB diverting to MAN, its just landed actually saw it on final approach. It made it all the way from FRA to just North of Anglesey where it circled 3 times and headed for MAN. Seems a bit starnge, surely a Belfast airport would of made more sense as pax can make there way to DUB by land!