Airport.

[CallMeCurious]

12 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Manx Solutions for Manx Problems.

There'll be someone employed to light a big bonfire to guide the planes in.

Or maybe they'll put a fog horn at the end of the runway.

Pilot turns off the engines and opens the window.

"Do you hear that? I think I can hear waves..oh ...crap!"

[asitis]

7 hours ago, madmanxpilot said:

At the moment, well when the ILS is working again, we have CAT1, which at best allows approaches in 1000 metres visibility and a decision height of 200 feet. Improved approach lighting would see this visibility requirement drop to 550 metres.

Of course destroying the gantry is the reason those minima are what they are. The omnipotent ones wouldn't listen about what aircraft needed, they were concerned about what project their CV needed.

[Non-Believer]

10 hours ago, cheesypeas said:

So pointless investment here then.

We'll almost certainly go for it then....

[madmanxpilot]

I came across this document, which, if you have time is we’ll worth a read.

It was produced by Price Waterhouse Coopers in 2018  and investigates aviation strategy on Guernsey.

Within it is commentary on the benefit of low visibility capability, how EasyJet asked for the runway to be extended before they’d go there (sound familiar?) and an interesting comparison with the Isle of Man.

It’s very relevant to things here, we have similar sized populations and our airport is a critical link to the outside world.

 

Guernsey_Air_Links_Strategy_-_Part_A_-_Final_Report_12_09_2018.pdf

Edited March 22, 2023 by madmanxpilot

[snowman]

The report quotes 2000m runway is required for Ryanair, yet they have operated from Belfast City which is 1829m. So it's not a binary factor.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56216764

Edited March 22, 2023 by snowman

[IOM]

2 hours ago, madmanxpilot said:

I came across this document, which, if you have time is we’ll worth a read.

It was produced by Price Waterhouse Coopers in 2018  and investigates aviation strategy on Guernsey.

Within it is commentary on the benefit of low visibility capability, how EasyJet asked for the runway to be extended before they’d go there (sound familiar?) and an interesting comparison with the Isle of Man.

It’s very relevant to things here, we have similar sized populations and our airport is a critical link to the outside world.

So just looking back the runway extension in 2008 cost £44m ? Was that done because without it EasyJet could not come here ? 

[madmanxpilot]

20 minutes ago, snowman said:

The report quotes 2000m runway is required for Ryanair, yet they have operated from Belfast City which is 1829m. So it's not a binary factor.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56216764

Indeed, the article says they pulled out originally because BHD couldn’t extend the runway, but now it seems they can manage - which they always could of course.

Maybe they won’t be able to fully derate take off thrust if they are full of fuel and passengers and the ambient conditions aren’t favourable, but they’ll cope. Just as EZY would have here without the horrendous expenditure we incurred extending the runway for them.  
 

[madmanxpilot]

11 minutes ago, IOM said:

So just looking back the runway extension in 2008 cost £44m ? Was that done because without it EasyJet could not come here ? 

Yes - despite what was said at the time. The extension was justified by saying RESAs were required, which was a red herring, or perhaps more appropriately an orange kipper.

 

Edited March 22, 2023 by madmanxpilot

[IOM]

5 minutes ago, madmanxpilot said:

Yes - despite what was said in the time. The extension was justified by saying RESAs were required, which was a red herring, or perhaps more appropriately an orange kipper.

 

So we effectively gave EasyJet a subsidy of £44m ! All those who complain about the underwriting of Loganair flights might want to think about that ! 

[madmanxpilot]

4 minutes ago, IOM said:

So we effectively gave EasyJet a subsidy of £44m ! All those who complain about the underwriting of Loganair flights might want to think about that ! 

Indeed.

[Roger Mexico]

6 minutes ago, IOM said:

So we effectively gave EasyJet a subsidy of £44m ! All those who complain about the underwriting of Loganair flights might want to think about that ! 

I don't really think that's true, though it's the reason normally given.  EasyJet started flying here before the runway extension opened and I suspect there are other airports they use that are smaller.  I got the impression at the time that the real reason was for executive jets and the like and they were convinced that the improved ability for them to land would mean that the Island would soon be swamped with billionaires and Hollywood stars (these were the Bell years). 

Reynolds was initially brought over to sell the project to other politicians and public and encouraging cheap flights from easyJet helped do that.  But I don't think they were the reason for the runway extension.

[Non-Believer]

Reasons/justifications for the extension "changed" over time IIRC? New reasons were tabled as their predecessors were discredited (or even ridiculed).

[asitis]

The then Chief minister Tony Brown wanted easy jet here at any cost ! and he meant any cost.

Perhaps a good time for a re read of a report given to Government in 2008, authored by a first class honours student. It was dismissed in Tynwald by Tony Brown who stated it was simply an academic document ! (Academic not being his strong point )

Many still pertinent observations.

Dissertation_redacted.pdf

[madmanxpilot]

45 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

I don't really think that's true, though it's the reason normally given.  EasyJet started flying here before the runway extension opened and I suspect there are other airports they use that are smaller.  I got the impression at the time that the real reason was for executive jets and the like and they were convinced that the improved ability for them to land would mean that the Island would soon be swamped with billionaires and Hollywood stars (these were the Bell years). 

Reynolds was initially brought over to sell the project to other politicians and public and encouraging cheap flights from easyJet helped do that.  But I don't think they were the reason for the runway extension.

They asked for it and were assured it would happen. The fact that they started services before the extension was complete indicates that they could have managed without it, we were just too keen to please. 

The overall benefit that they have brought is questionable, we have lost route variety and frequency as a result.

Other airports dealt with the RESA issue by putting in arrester beds.

If any of the ministers who were responsible for the decision making at the time were put on oath and asked the question, maybe the real reason would be revealed. At the moment all you’ll get in is, and I quote: ‘ of course the runway was extended at EasyJet’s request, but if you ask me that question in public, I’ll just deny it’ .

Edited March 22, 2023 by madmanxpilot

[0bserver]

1 hour ago, asitis said:

The then Chief minister Tony Brown wanted easy jet here at any cost ! and he meant any cost.

Perhaps a good time for a re read of a report given to Government in 2008, authored by a first class honours student. It was dismissed in Tynwald by Tony Brown who stated it was simply an academic document ! (Academic not being his strong point )

Many still pertinent observations.

Dissertation_redacted.pdf 609.62 kB · 12 downloads

He just wanted to be on that TV show 'Airline' and meet Leo.