Jump to content

Flybe nosedives on profits warning


Andy Onchan

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TerryFuchwit said:

There isn't a single route outside of Liverpool that has enough demand for multiple operators to the same airport.  

So we come down to the same dilemma on every route, and Liverpool is no different to any other.

Big planes, large volume carriers, less frequently but budget fares or protected smaller regional operator, smaller planes,  more flights, and higher prices.

Its a marriage of sustainability, convenience and cost.

Liverpool is an odd case. IoMG effectively subsidises one smaller operator with the patient transfer contract. Traffic volume doesn’t really justify two operators. Just look at Euromanx and Emerald.  Of course in those days the number of travelling patients was a fraction of current levels.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, TerryFuchwit said:

That isn't how Ryanair or Easyjet work

Very true, Ryanair and EasyJet work by paying little to airports, who make money via passenger throughput and airside shopping eating etc. For the IOM this just doesn't work. It may of course have been the ludicrous basis for the predictions of 1.5 to 2 million passengers per annum by now justifying huge spends on airport infrastructure . We have rowed back somewhat from that position with ATC staffing levels having been allowed to drop in the guise of cost saving to a level where they can barely now keep the airport open.

What I can tell you, from the inside, the airport is one of the worst iterations of mismanagement in Government on the island.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2021 at 11:11 AM, Andy Onchan said:

One of which was CityWing with max 19 seats. I travelled on that flight a few times for business and most of the time the load factor was 50% at most.

Different ones in different eras. I was thinking of Manx and PaceGrand/Jersey European. The Jersey European flight was a Blackpool-IOM-Belfast hop. Blackpool to Belfast passengers stayed on board. Passengers were dropped off and picked up at Ronaldsway

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, asitis said:

Anyone know the rationale why the starter extensions on 26 / 08 need widening ?

To allow aircraft to do U turns on the runway where it is currently too narrow for this to be possible. 

If remedial works were ever done on the taxiway that passes the jet centre, the landing distance available would have to be reduced on runway 26 (and obviously the take off distance on 08) to ensure aircraft did not become stuck on the narrow starter strip.

It shouldn't be necessary however as we managed perfectly well before that starter extension was ever even thought of.

NOTAMS would ensure crews were aware of the closure of the taxiway and by default the narrow part of the runway (08 starter strip).

A total waste of money IMHO. 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...