Southampton-3
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2024
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Southampton Airport ownership situation
Okay, so I live close to Southampton, use the airport often and obviously want it to thrive and have more routes in the future. But there is one main thing I haven't seen mentioned much on this thread:
AGS are clearly in the process of trying to sell Southampton, Glasgow and Aberdeen Airports. There was a report just 2 days ago from The Times saying Manchester Airports Group have joined Aena in bidding to buy the 3 AGS airports. You can easily find the report with a quick Google search.
Having flown from Southampton often in recent months it seems very clear that after all of the millions AGS spent on extending the runway, things are now in a holding pattern when it comes to the future of their airports. It is no coincidence that all 3 of their airports have stagnated in terms of passenger numbers and new routes over the past 6-12 months.
I have no inside knowledge at all but here is my prediction: as soon as AGS sells up their 3 airports, including Southampton, then a real short and long-term plan can be made, especially for Southampton which now has a longer runway and can attract a wider variety of carriers. Whatever the limitations at Southampton, there is still plenty of room for growth but it has to be smart and focused with certain carriers and routes being prioritised. easyJet is obviously the main focus here and city breaks and key sun routes should be the priority.
Most of all, having a new owner that wants to invest in the airport and have a clear plan for its long-term future will only be a good thing for SOU. Right now it seems like AGS are only focused on one thing: a sale. I often travel to Heathrow, Gatwick and Bournemouth to fly because Southampton doesn't offer the routes I need but I hope this changes in the future. It is a brilliant airport that has so much potential and as soon as the ownership situation is sorted, I'm excited to see what lies in store for its future.
AGS are clearly in the process of trying to sell Southampton, Glasgow and Aberdeen Airports. There was a report just 2 days ago from The Times saying Manchester Airports Group have joined Aena in bidding to buy the 3 AGS airports. You can easily find the report with a quick Google search.
Having flown from Southampton often in recent months it seems very clear that after all of the millions AGS spent on extending the runway, things are now in a holding pattern when it comes to the future of their airports. It is no coincidence that all 3 of their airports have stagnated in terms of passenger numbers and new routes over the past 6-12 months.
I have no inside knowledge at all but here is my prediction: as soon as AGS sells up their 3 airports, including Southampton, then a real short and long-term plan can be made, especially for Southampton which now has a longer runway and can attract a wider variety of carriers. Whatever the limitations at Southampton, there is still plenty of room for growth but it has to be smart and focused with certain carriers and routes being prioritised. easyJet is obviously the main focus here and city breaks and key sun routes should be the priority.
Most of all, having a new owner that wants to invest in the airport and have a clear plan for its long-term future will only be a good thing for SOU. Right now it seems like AGS are only focused on one thing: a sale. I often travel to Heathrow, Gatwick and Bournemouth to fly because Southampton doesn't offer the routes I need but I hope this changes in the future. It is a brilliant airport that has so much potential and as soon as the ownership situation is sorted, I'm excited to see what lies in store for its future.
Another disaster on the PMI-SOU Monday Easy flight,my family just about to board and they were told the flight cancelled !! So no explanation ,direct result all pax stranded in the airport .
It has cost Ł1000+ to get a flight this morning to Stansted ,then taxi back to Southampton.
Easy.....never again
It has cost Ł1000+ to get a flight this morning to Stansted ,then taxi back to Southampton.
Easy.....never again
Last edited by LTNman; 2nd Jul 2024 at 11:01.
If it can be proved that SOU could have accepted the flight, the ball is firmly back in EZY's court.
Please in future refrain from making profound statements on matters that you apparently do not fully understand..
You can blame SOU ATC or staff attendance but the fact remains the aircraft did not fly into the airport, as it was late.
So with the Section 106 in place how many late aircraft have arrived and departed outside published hours this year? Looking at easyJet the answer seems to be none.
So with the Section 106 in place how many late aircraft have arrived and departed outside published hours this year? Looking at easyJet the answer seems to be none.
Yet again you miss the point. The current Section 106 would have permitted operation of the flight. It then comes down to whether SOU could staff the extension, particularly NATS providing ATCO cover, which I suspect was technically feasible with current regulation of hours legislation.
If it can be proved that SOU could have accepted the flight, the ball is firmly back in EZY's court.
Please in future refrain from making profound statements on matters that you apparently do not fully understand..
If it can be proved that SOU could have accepted the flight, the ball is firmly back in EZY's court.
Please in future refrain from making profound statements on matters that you apparently do not fully understand..
).And surely the point is that people's holidays have been ruined and they've been hugely inconvenienced, and that's before they start arguing the toss about compensation - who wants to have to do that?
All the talk of the Section 106 agreement and whose is at fault for the cancellations is massively irrelevant if you’re a passenger. The frequency of major disruptions isn’t good and that does nothing for customer confidence.
It doesn’t help that the flying - in the knowledge of the restrictions at SOU - was planned on late slots which limits leeway on bad days, irrespective of weather, ATC, tech, crewing or anything else being the cause of said bad day.
It doesn’t help that the flying - in the knowledge of the restrictions at SOU - was planned on late slots which limits leeway on bad days, irrespective of weather, ATC, tech, crewing or anything else being the cause of said bad day.
Does the Section 106 cover movements or just arrivals? It looks like EZY didn't operate the flight as it wouldn't get back out again and in these situations EZY prefer to take the hit and preserve the next days programme (I speak from personal experience ).
And surely the point is that people's holidays have been ruined and they've been hugely inconvenienced, and that's before they start arguing the toss about compensation - who wants to have to do that?
).And surely the point is that people's holidays have been ruined and they've been hugely inconvenienced, and that's before they start arguing the toss about compensation - who wants to have to do that?
This may be yet another case of staffing not being available rather than imposition of Section 106 restrictions.
From my distant past experience NATS staffing was normally the weak point with late stays to accommodate delayed flights being voluntary!
NATS Air Traffic Controllers duty hours are legally regulated. With the current normal airport opening of 0630HR this should easily permit late movements up to 0100HR, or even later, while still complying with the legal requirements.
If ATC provision is still the weak link, maybe the time for AGS to start leaning on NATS to sort this issue if they want to keep the contract? Maybe time to look at "NATS Solutions", the NATS equivalent of a LCC, to take over the contract if cost is the issue?
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the doghouse (usually)
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
3 Posts
Sorry TCAS, your knowledge of SOU ops is out of date and may be leading non-industry posters on this thread down the wrong alleyways and to false conclusions.
It's been a long time since you retired and lots of things have changed/evolved since then. Plus not all the answers can be found in documentation.
Absolute latest close for SOU has always been 2330L by PPR (although pre-covid I know of a couple of occasions when the rules were bent for a couple of minutes max to prevent diversions)
0630-2330 is a long operational day to cover using only two ATC watches given that SOU is a non-24 hour unit.
It's also a shoestring airport and the ATC contract makes up a huge part of the budget, so hiring more ATCOs isn't automatically the answer just for the odd late flight. In addition, ATCOs are hard to come by nowadays, there's a retirement boom coupled with a global shortage of new entrants and in the UK bigger and more important ATC units than SOU will take priority for new trainees. Plus not all of the ATCOs posted to SOU will actually qualify, some fail to do so.
In fairness to SOU their new post-covid management were able to actually get the runway built which was a big achievement. However there are yet more challenges for the place to overcome. The runway is still short and narrow, there are obstacles in the runway 20 climbout, it only has a precision approach to one end and even then it's only CAT I, it has limited parking, restricted opening hours and isn't H24, limited space both inside and out for car parks and retail to generate revenue, hardly and other revenue-generating businesses on site apart from Signature, Jetworks and Adams Morey landside. It's also only an hour from Heathrow which just happens to be one of the world's best-connected airports and which sucks up a huge proportion of the region's travellers, with Gatwick, Bournemouth and Bristol taking most of the rest.
SOU is a small fish in a big pond and it doesn't have the economies of scale to make money and compete at the moment, and even getting to break-even will require further challenges to be overcome.
It's been a long time since you retired and lots of things have changed/evolved since then. Plus not all the answers can be found in documentation.
Absolute latest close for SOU has always been 2330L by PPR (although pre-covid I know of a couple of occasions when the rules were bent for a couple of minutes max to prevent diversions)
0630-2330 is a long operational day to cover using only two ATC watches given that SOU is a non-24 hour unit.
It's also a shoestring airport and the ATC contract makes up a huge part of the budget, so hiring more ATCOs isn't automatically the answer just for the odd late flight. In addition, ATCOs are hard to come by nowadays, there's a retirement boom coupled with a global shortage of new entrants and in the UK bigger and more important ATC units than SOU will take priority for new trainees. Plus not all of the ATCOs posted to SOU will actually qualify, some fail to do so.
In fairness to SOU their new post-covid management were able to actually get the runway built which was a big achievement. However there are yet more challenges for the place to overcome. The runway is still short and narrow, there are obstacles in the runway 20 climbout, it only has a precision approach to one end and even then it's only CAT I, it has limited parking, restricted opening hours and isn't H24, limited space both inside and out for car parks and retail to generate revenue, hardly and other revenue-generating businesses on site apart from Signature, Jetworks and Adams Morey landside. It's also only an hour from Heathrow which just happens to be one of the world's best-connected airports and which sucks up a huge proportion of the region's travellers, with Gatwick, Bournemouth and Bristol taking most of the rest.
SOU is a small fish in a big pond and it doesn't have the economies of scale to make money and compete at the moment, and even getting to break-even will require further challenges to be overcome.
Sorry TCAS, your knowledge of SOU ops is out of date and may be leading non-industry posters on this thread down the wrong alleyways and to false conclusions.
It's been a long time since you retired and lots of things have changed/evolved since then. Plus not all the answers can be found in documentation.
Absolute latest close for SOU has always been 2330L by PPR (although pre-covid I know of a couple of occasions when the rules were bent for a couple of minutes max to prevent diversions)
0630-2330 is a long operational day to cover using only two ATC watches given that SOU is a non-24 hour unit.
It's also a shoestring airport and the ATC contract makes up a huge part of the budget, so hiring more ATCOs isn't automatically the answer just for the odd late flight. In addition, ATCOs are hard to come by nowadays, there's a retirement boom coupled with a global shortage of new entrants and in the UK bigger and more important ATC units than SOU will take priority for new trainees. Plus not all of the ATCOs posted to SOU will actually qualify, some fail to do so.
In fairness to SOU their new post-covid management were able to actually get the runway built which was a big achievement. However there are yet more challenges for the place to overcome. The runway is still short and narrow, there are obstacles in the runway 20 climbout, it only has a precision approach to one end and even then it's only CAT I, it has limited parking, restricted opening hours and isn't H24, limited space both inside and out for car parks and retail to generate revenue, hardly and other revenue-generating businesses on site apart from Signature, Jetworks and Adams Morey landside. It's also only an hour from Heathrow which just happens to be one of the world's best-connected airports and which sucks up a huge proportion of the region's travellers, with Gatwick, Bournemouth and Bristol taking most of the rest.
SOU is a small fish in a big pond and it doesn't have the economies of scale to make money and compete at the moment, and even getting to break-even will require further challenges to be overcome.
It's been a long time since you retired and lots of things have changed/evolved since then. Plus not all the answers can be found in documentation.
Absolute latest close for SOU has always been 2330L by PPR (although pre-covid I know of a couple of occasions when the rules were bent for a couple of minutes max to prevent diversions)
0630-2330 is a long operational day to cover using only two ATC watches given that SOU is a non-24 hour unit.
It's also a shoestring airport and the ATC contract makes up a huge part of the budget, so hiring more ATCOs isn't automatically the answer just for the odd late flight. In addition, ATCOs are hard to come by nowadays, there's a retirement boom coupled with a global shortage of new entrants and in the UK bigger and more important ATC units than SOU will take priority for new trainees. Plus not all of the ATCOs posted to SOU will actually qualify, some fail to do so.
In fairness to SOU their new post-covid management were able to actually get the runway built which was a big achievement. However there are yet more challenges for the place to overcome. The runway is still short and narrow, there are obstacles in the runway 20 climbout, it only has a precision approach to one end and even then it's only CAT I, it has limited parking, restricted opening hours and isn't H24, limited space both inside and out for car parks and retail to generate revenue, hardly and other revenue-generating businesses on site apart from Signature, Jetworks and Adams Morey landside. It's also only an hour from Heathrow which just happens to be one of the world's best-connected airports and which sucks up a huge proportion of the region's travellers, with Gatwick, Bournemouth and Bristol taking most of the rest.
SOU is a small fish in a big pond and it doesn't have the economies of scale to make money and compete at the moment, and even getting to break-even will require further challenges to be overcome.
You say 2330 is the absolute latest that the airport is willing to stay open until, on checking the current UK AIP AD2 entry it actually indicates " PPR until 2300" (local time). This is making it clearer that SOU are not serious about accommodating late flights when the Section 106 would under many circumstances permit them, and ATC (at least) could legally accommodate them within a controller's duty time (they now only need one on duty for low density traffic)..Consequently I dispute a need for any more ATCO's., Sitting around drinking tea for a few hours at the end of a shift waiting for one arrival and a departure is hardly stressful! Its a case of maximising the resource you have to get best value for money.
With the bottom line in mind, AGS could probably do with looking at NATS Solutions as a cost saver, or even another ANSP?
Presumably you mean " their new post-covid management were able to actually get the runway extension" built"?
The current car parking previously supported well over million PAX in a year, so see no immediate issue there.
SOU previously made a profit, will it not do so again?
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: In the doghouse (usually)
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
3 Posts
I mean that there's been a big debate on here about the Section 106 agreement as if it holds all of the answers to whether SOU can accommodate late flights or not, and you yourself have implied that somehow SOU are turning away traffic that they should be able to handle and so pointing people towards claiming compensation.
However, in reality there's a myriad of different reasons why flights may not be able to operate late at night, either on a one-off basis or as a schedule. These factors will be political, economic, technical and operational and will be decided in ops centres, ATC units and flight decks and hardly anyone on this forum will be party to even some of those decisions and so will be unable to comment with any authority.
NATS Solutions can't bid for existing NATS Services contracts as per an agreement with the unions.
My mistake about the word extension, that was missing in error from my previous post.
SOU may no doubt turn a profit again in the future, but the market it was ideally placed to serve is a shadow of its former self and it's not well-equipped to serve the new growth markets in UK aviation, so that profit will be harder to come by than before.
However, in reality there's a myriad of different reasons why flights may not be able to operate late at night, either on a one-off basis or as a schedule. These factors will be political, economic, technical and operational and will be decided in ops centres, ATC units and flight decks and hardly anyone on this forum will be party to even some of those decisions and so will be unable to comment with any authority.
NATS Solutions can't bid for existing NATS Services contracts as per an agreement with the unions.
My mistake about the word extension, that was missing in error from my previous post.
SOU may no doubt turn a profit again in the future, but the market it was ideally placed to serve is a shadow of its former self and it's not well-equipped to serve the new growth markets in UK aviation, so that profit will be harder to come by than before.
I mean that there's been a big debate on here about the Section 106 agreement as if it holds all of the answers to whether SOU can accommodate late flights or not, and you yourself have implied that somehow SOU are turning away traffic that they should be able to handle and so pointing people towards claiming compensation.
…...
…...
If SOU are serious about accommodating delayed flights their AIP entry should read “PPR until 2300, and by arrangement”.
Thanks for spreading this to the Southampton thread without naming me but still spreading the negativity.
You might note I dismissed it out of hand to start with, but actually took the time to think through how it could work, and I did dismiss the Emirates rumour as there is not a chance.
However, it would be amiss to think that some of the hundreds of thousands of passengers a month on the Dubai/London rotation do not originate from the Bournemouth catchment area.
There will never be the market for an 787 on the route, but maybe, just maybe, a couple of FlyDubai 737MAX flights a week is plausible, but only once the other rumoured destinations (BFS/LPL etc) are serviced. I also qualified this with the fact their 73M fleet is going to triple in size, so they need to fly somewhere.
This is nothing more than speculation, so please do not present it as anything but that, but atleast I took the time to think for myself rather than jump on the bandwagon of dismissing it.
You might note I dismissed it out of hand to start with, but actually took the time to think through how it could work, and I did dismiss the Emirates rumour as there is not a chance.
However, it would be amiss to think that some of the hundreds of thousands of passengers a month on the Dubai/London rotation do not originate from the Bournemouth catchment area.
There will never be the market for an 787 on the route, but maybe, just maybe, a couple of FlyDubai 737MAX flights a week is plausible, but only once the other rumoured destinations (BFS/LPL etc) are serviced. I also qualified this with the fact their 73M fleet is going to triple in size, so they need to fly somewhere.
This is nothing more than speculation, so please do not present it as anything but that, but atleast I took the time to think for myself rather than jump on the bandwagon of dismissing it.
My post had nothing to do with your post on the BOH thread. I can't even remember what you posted without going to the BOH thread. My comments were not directed to you but the person who initiated the rumour in the first place which wasn't you.
Talk about taking things too seriously, you need to chill out.
There's been a long debate on here about late opening to accommodate a late-running away-based aircraft.
Most of the costs of remaining open would presumably fall to the airport operator. So my question is, from a purely financial point of view, is it worth staying open for an extra hour or two to accommodate a single aircraft?
Most of the costs of remaining open would presumably fall to the airport operator. So my question is, from a purely financial point of view, is it worth staying open for an extra hour or two to accommodate a single aircraft?
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's been a long debate on here about late opening to accommodate a late-running away-based aircraft.
Most of the costs of remaining open would presumably fall to the airport operator. So my question is, from a purely financial point of view, is it worth staying open for an extra hour or two to accommodate a single aircraft?
Most of the costs of remaining open would presumably fall to the airport operator. So my question is, from a purely financial point of view, is it worth staying open for an extra hour or two to accommodate a single aircraft?
Are you actually living in the real world or just typing aloud hoping for a breakthrough. After the dramas regarding the runway extension do you honestly think that there would be an appetite for a possible change in the airports operating hours?
Honestly I don't know why you always bring this topic up.
It is what it is, simple as that.
