Airport.

[Roger Mexico]

17 minutes ago, Nellie said:

That might be an interesting FOI request! 

All together now: COMMERCIAL CONFIDENTIALITY.

(Even though on-going preferential treatment may well be illegal)

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

I do wonder, however, if they could look at perhaps closing the airport during lulls in schedules to give a bit of slack. So, say  there are very few flights that arrive/depart between 11 and 3, so it is closed giving the option to open later in the evening without impacting on ATC shifts limitations. I don't know, (and that may be contrary to CAA rules) but it needs a creative look at so that the staff they have are maximised for times when actual flights use the airport. 

Well that's sort of what they've been doing for shorter periods to give ATC staff a statutory break and, even though they announce it in advance, the airlines just turn up anyway and complain loudly that the airport isn't open.

[Gladys]

11 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Well that's sort of what they've been doing for shorter periods to give ATC staff a statutory break and, even though they announce it in advance, the airlines just turn up anyway and complain loudly that the airport isn't open.

Yes, but is it formalised? UK airports are reducing the flights to meet their handling capacity, should we be doing the same?

[asitis]

8 hours ago, Gladys said:

Competitive tenders for what? 

Shipping, as in rival to the SPCO. 

[asitis]

8 hours ago, finlo said:

Acquisition of the racket,  wasn't it put out over a bank holiday weekend with tenders to be in within an incredibly short timeframe or some such nonsense?

I seem to recall it was either Christmas or the New Year I think .

[asitis]

7 hours ago, Gladys said:

Agreed, and I know nothing about the technicalities of running an airport, but it just strikes me that if you are staffing an airport with limited staff, you need to make sure that they are using their shift patterns to deal with as many flights as possible. 

Re light aircraft, how do little provincial airstrips get on with ATC ?  They, surely, don't have an air traffic control tower with a full complement of ATCs? 

I would imagine that there are rules and regulations about whether the airport could be downgraded during certain hours to be run in a lesser capacity. You are correct small airfields range in ATC services from none i.e. done by the pilots themselves, to a lesser degree of control and oversight. I suspect Heathrow on Sea can't be run like that due to declared licensing standards. Someone like Gerromonside would know !

[Steady Eddie]

14 hours ago, asitis said:

...not to mention the hidden Steam Packet report and the outrageous sum of money we blew on the purchase ! Oh and ensuring there were no competitive tenders to even explore.

The Steam Packet is turning into the Bus Vannin of the seas which many said it would. On top of the deal we’re not £100 M into two new ships and £100 M likely into a new terminal in Liverpool. In total over half a billion pounds to run a ferry company that all its done is put up fares making it more difficult for people to get here. 

[GD4ELI]

32 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said:

The Steam Packet is turning into the Bus Vannin of the seas which many said it would. On top of the deal we’re not £100 M into two new ships and £100 M likely into a new terminal in Liverpool. In total over half a billion pounds to run a ferry company that all its done is put up fares making it more difficult for people to get here. 

Your sums are a bit out I think.

 

[0bserver]

33 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said:

The Steam Packet is turning into the Bus Vannin of the seas which many said it would. On top of the deal we’re not £100 M into two new ships and £100 M likely into a new terminal in Liverpool. In total over half a billion pounds to run a ferry company that all its done is put up fares making it more difficult for people to get here. 

You couldn't be more wrong really. The new ship was needed anyway whether owned by IOMG or the vulture capitalists at Banco Espírito and Macquarie.

The IOMSPC wasn't consulted over the new Liverpool Terminal - that was entirely down to DOI who thought they knew best. Peel Group offered to build a terminal, at their own cost,  about half a mile further up the river - but this wasn't good enough for the politicos, crayonistas and assorted chinless wonders within DOI. So I'm not sure how you're laying that one on the IOMSPC? 

If anything IOMSPC is, for now, the only Government-owned enterprise that is actually making a profit (covid period excepted) and relatively well run. 

[emesde]

6 hours ago, 0bserver said:

Peel Group offered to build a terminal, at their own cost,  about half a mile further up the river - but this wasn't good enough for the politicos,

I was under the impression that the free build option had been withdrawn. But you are saying that it was a DOI  decision to spend £70,000,000 rather than have a 10 minutes extra walk. If that is true it is the most scandalous thing the DOI. Is accused of. It makes the horror of the prom look pretty minor. As it does with the Airport parking where they chose to replace a system that was producing an income of £600,000 pa with a system that I suspect only produces a fraction of that. What is the matter with these people.? 

[0bserver]

4 minutes ago, emesde said:

I was under the impression that the free build option had been withdrawn. But you are saying that it was a DOI  decision to spend £70,000,000 rather than have a 10 minutes extra walk. If that is true it is the most scandalous thing the DOI. Is accused of. It makes the horror of the prom look pretty minor. As it does with the Airport parking where they chose to replace a system that was producing an income of £600,000 pa with a system that I suspect only produces a fraction of that. What is the matter with these people.? 

My understanding is the offer was only withdrawn after DOI/IOMG said it was unsuitable and they would do their own thing. 

Near Kings Parade/Mariners Wharf/Queens Dock if I remember correctly. 

Edited July 14, 2022 by 0bserver

[emesde]

1 minute ago, 0bserver said:

My understanding is the offer was only withdrawn after DOI/IOMG said it was unsuitable and they would do their own thing. 

That's aweful, but seems quite in keeping with a department that seems to have no concerns about spending money with no regard to value or need. If that was all true I would like to see the money with held from a lot of pension pots and early retirement pay offs. Disgusting.! 

[NoTailT]

What concerns me is why people act surprised that the DOI does things that it does, as it has done for a long time.

[0bserver]

3 minutes ago, NoTailT said:

What concerns me is why people act surprised that the DOI does things that it does, as it has done for a long time.

Like the Cabbage engine. They were offered an 'off the shelf' engine but decided it was too expensive so ordered the cabbage and it's cost 3 times the other option. 

[Numbnuts]

1 hour ago, 0bserver said:

Like the Cabbage engine. They were offered an 'off the shelf' engine but decided it was too expensive so ordered the cabbage and it's cost 3 times the other option. 

And still isn't in service