Airport Consultative Committee
- Thread starter TheLocalYokel
- Start date
- Tagged users None
TheLocalYokel
Honorary Member Of Forums4airports
- Jan 14, 2009
- 16,688
- 343
- IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
- Yes
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #22
Not been appointed yet I suppose. There's certainly been no public announcement.
forest1979
Well-Known Member
- Mar 21, 2014
- 368
- 63
This was my concern.. ruling out something before it even begins. Runway extension will always be hard, toxic for some but not impossible.. it's about vision and the future. If it is out, I can't wait to read about the reasons why this time
- Moderator
- #24
It may be that the airport's board may think that a runway extension will be an expensive and possibly controversial project for not a lot of monetary gain for the airport. If they did extend the runway what would it gain them? But you would've thought they would've not ruled it out publicly at least before any masterplan was released.
- Moderator
- #26
As long as TOM are happy to keep diverting occasionally then i doubt the board will be concerned.
andrewgreen
Well-Known Member
- Dec 7, 2015
- 175
- 28
Thomson maybe be happy but they would be a lot happier if they didn't have to and also it's bound to put off other potential similar routes from being started , in my opinion there are 3 things Bristol needs to keep up the expansion and they are
1) A runway extension
2) A runway extension
And
3) A runway extension!
It's a no brainier !
1) A runway extension
2) A runway extension
And
3) A runway extension!
It's a no brainier !
- Moderator
- #28
Not to the board by the looks of it. It may be that they will concentrate their efforts and their money on the terminal and access. Realistically they could spend a lot of money on a runway extension and get very little return on the investment for it. The airport already has TOM long haul and with Qatar going to Cardiff Middle East is unlikely and even further is even more unlikely. In the boards mind the runway is perfectly adequate for 99% of BRS's flights which are short haul. So i'd imagine they would want to concentrate any infrastructure investment to the terminal ie maybe a jetbridge for the TOM long haul flights, more stands to attract more based aircraft from the current and maybe future airlines, more on site parking, more onsite hotels and better access to the airport by road, bus and rail. I'm sure there's other stuff i haven't thought of.
TheLocalYokel
Honorary Member Of Forums4airports
- Jan 14, 2009
- 16,688
- 343
- IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
- Yes
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #29
The current runway length is 2011 metres. Without taking full occupation of Felton Common the airport's current master plan says that 2,400 metres is the maximum length that could be obtained. Even for this there would be a requirement for part of the common to come under airport control.
There are other lesser options in the master plan but all would require the A 38 to be dropped into a 150-metre long tunnel. One is to extend the runway by 239 metres plus a 150-metre starter strip. This would add about 389 metres to the 27 take-off run but only about 150 metres to the 09 take-off run. With this there would be no need to encroach onto the common.
The local authority declared Felton Common to be a Local Nature Reserve under the relevant legislation many years ago. In itself that is not a complete block on a runway extension involving the common but clearly it would be a huge boost to the argument of the many objectors who would be all over any runway extension attempt like a rash. When the local authority was considering the airport's huge expansion application a few years ago objections came from as far away as Australia.
Adding 389 metres as well as a tunnel would cost tens of millions of pounds. The airport owners would have to take a view on whether this outlay would be justified in terms of the return. There is no imperative to splash out huge sums to enable a limited number of long haul routes if these routes are less profitable for the airport than additional short haul ones.
It was thought that the B787 and the A350 would revolutionise long haul travel possibilities from airports with short runways. Unfortunately, the reality is that they are not quite as efficient from such runways as was hoped. Spending a huge sum taking the runway to around 2,400 metres might be considered a dubious act because that length, although obviously longer than they have currently, would still have its limitations.
Having said all this, and I'm trying to look at the situation from the possible viewpoint of the owners even though I may not agree with it, a thorough look at every aspect of extending the runway ought surely to be part of the major reappraisal of the master plan.
There are other lesser options in the master plan but all would require the A 38 to be dropped into a 150-metre long tunnel. One is to extend the runway by 239 metres plus a 150-metre starter strip. This would add about 389 metres to the 27 take-off run but only about 150 metres to the 09 take-off run. With this there would be no need to encroach onto the common.
The local authority declared Felton Common to be a Local Nature Reserve under the relevant legislation many years ago. In itself that is not a complete block on a runway extension involving the common but clearly it would be a huge boost to the argument of the many objectors who would be all over any runway extension attempt like a rash. When the local authority was considering the airport's huge expansion application a few years ago objections came from as far away as Australia.
Adding 389 metres as well as a tunnel would cost tens of millions of pounds. The airport owners would have to take a view on whether this outlay would be justified in terms of the return. There is no imperative to splash out huge sums to enable a limited number of long haul routes if these routes are less profitable for the airport than additional short haul ones.
It was thought that the B787 and the A350 would revolutionise long haul travel possibilities from airports with short runways. Unfortunately, the reality is that they are not quite as efficient from such runways as was hoped. Spending a huge sum taking the runway to around 2,400 metres might be considered a dubious act because that length, although obviously longer than they have currently, would still have its limitations.
Having said all this, and I'm trying to look at the situation from the possible viewpoint of the owners even though I may not agree with it, a thorough look at every aspect of extending the runway ought surely to be part of the major reappraisal of the master plan.
andrewgreen
Well-Known Member
- Dec 7, 2015
- 175
- 28
I totally agree with everything Jerry and TLY have said but knowing how long these things take and the amount of opposition there will be to it and the fact that although it may not be needed right now it will be in future surely they should at least start the ball rolling now.
The saying ' build it and they will come ' comes to mind here and Bristol in recent years has invested a lot and reaped the benefits unlike some of its neighbours who as a result have stagnated .
The saying ' build it and they will come ' comes to mind here and Bristol in recent years has invested a lot and reaped the benefits unlike some of its neighbours who as a result have stagnated .
Marko1
Well-Known Member
- Feb 1, 2013
- 2,056
- 183
Personally I think not including a runway extension could be a mistake. Not only could it provide extra apron space alongside but what about the cargo ambitions that have been mentioned by the outgoing ceo. I worry about the performance of the new 737 max and a321neo that are likely to be the stalwarts of short to medium haul travel that brs would need to rely on particularly when the b757 goes in a year or two . Surely a land grab has to be in the equation as I can't see where more apron space long term could be created .
andrewgreen
Well-Known Member
- Dec 7, 2015
- 175
- 28
Care to elaborate ?
TheLocalYokel
Honorary Member Of Forums4airports
- Jan 14, 2009
- 16,688
- 343
- IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
- Yes
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #34
Whilst all this is hypothetical until the airport decides to apply for permission for a runway extension (which looks unlikely at the moment according to the consultative committee meeting minutes) the provision of land for a replacement nature reserve might also be a problem. Almost certainly the local authority would require the lost nature reserve to be replaced.
If the 2,400 metre option (involving a 389 metre extension for both runways) was the one the airport went for the localiser and potentially approach lighting would need to be relocated on the common which might also have to be regraded to provide adequate obstacle clearance. This would mean the airport taking control of an an area of common approximately 240 metres by 150 metres (vide current master plan).
Anything beyond 2,400 metres would lead to further encroachment of the common. The below is an extract from the current master plan.
Any improvements to the take off runs that would be achieved would be subject to licensing approval from the Civil Aviation Authority. It is possible that requirements to improve safety standards could erode some of the potential benefit. There is a further issue with the runway 27 approach lighting. The current approach light array is truncated to avoid the need to encroach on Felton Common. Any changes to the 27 landing threshold would require the approach lights to relocated and possibly extended. This could have a significant effect on the Common.
North Somerset Council has declared Felton Common as a Local Nature Reserve under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949. BIA has not, at this stage, carried out a detailed assessment of the impact of extending the approach lights and airport control on to the Common, but it is clear that the effects could be potentially significant. Furthermore any extension would cause the noise impact on the houses adjacent to Felton Common to increase, probably requiring the relocation of some householders. On the positive side a runway extension might remove the need for some use of reverse thrust on landing and allow take-offs to be undertaken at lower, and hence quieter, power settings.
Although the master plan was written over ten years ago I'm very surprised that the airport admitted that it had not carried out a detailed assessment of the impact of extending the approach lights and airport control onto the common. Without such a study how can they really know? It's just an educated guess. It looks as though the matter won't be addressed this time either.
If the 2,400 metre option (involving a 389 metre extension for both runways) was the one the airport went for the localiser and potentially approach lighting would need to be relocated on the common which might also have to be regraded to provide adequate obstacle clearance. This would mean the airport taking control of an an area of common approximately 240 metres by 150 metres (vide current master plan).
Anything beyond 2,400 metres would lead to further encroachment of the common. The below is an extract from the current master plan.
Any improvements to the take off runs that would be achieved would be subject to licensing approval from the Civil Aviation Authority. It is possible that requirements to improve safety standards could erode some of the potential benefit. There is a further issue with the runway 27 approach lighting. The current approach light array is truncated to avoid the need to encroach on Felton Common. Any changes to the 27 landing threshold would require the approach lights to relocated and possibly extended. This could have a significant effect on the Common.
North Somerset Council has declared Felton Common as a Local Nature Reserve under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949. BIA has not, at this stage, carried out a detailed assessment of the impact of extending the approach lights and airport control on to the Common, but it is clear that the effects could be potentially significant. Furthermore any extension would cause the noise impact on the houses adjacent to Felton Common to increase, probably requiring the relocation of some householders. On the positive side a runway extension might remove the need for some use of reverse thrust on landing and allow take-offs to be undertaken at lower, and hence quieter, power settings.
Although the master plan was written over ten years ago I'm very surprised that the airport admitted that it had not carried out a detailed assessment of the impact of extending the approach lights and airport control onto the common. Without such a study how can they really know? It's just an educated guess. It looks as though the matter won't be addressed this time either.
kraktoa
Well-Known Member
- Jun 16, 2013
- 849
- 63
Over Heard a medium level manager saying that ' felton wont like it' followed by laughter. My ears pricked at that. Last week. May not be anything.
TheLocalYokel
Honorary Member Of Forums4airports
- Jan 14, 2009
- 16,688
- 343
- IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
- Yes
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #36
It might be in connection with the possibility of more night flights that is being discussed in the BRS General thread at the moment.
The next consultative committee meeting is tomorrow, 1 November, and one of the items on the agenda is a discussion on community engagement with the new master plan process. We might learn more about the way the airport will give the public a chance to put forward its views.
I suspect that a certain parish councillor member of the committee will also be asking questions about next summer's night flight programme. She's already listed in the agenda asking questions of the airport management which in fact might be about the night flying issue. For as many years as I care to remember she has always been an implacable opponent of BRS development.
TheLocalYokel
Honorary Member Of Forums4airports
- Jan 14, 2009
- 16,688
- 343
- IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
- Yes
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #37
Meeting held 1 November 2017
Minutes are now on the airport website and can be read in full at the link at the bottom of this post.
Very little in the minutes of which BRS followers on this website are not already aware. The airport chairman, Janis Kong, was at the meeting in the absence of a chief executive. Nothing was mentioned about a replacement for Robert Sinclair.
The few 'highlights' taken from the minutes are listed below
+ The chairman confirmed that the airport is on track for over 8 mppa this year. Ryanair cancellations had not had a significant effect on the airport. She apologised to members for not keeping them aware of the partial slot co-ordination application. The chairman also gave details of the new shareholders in the airport company.
+ Mention was made of the opening of the enhanced Silver Zone car park.
+ The committee was told of new routes by TUI, easyJet and Ryanair which have been discussed in this forum at various times following the various announcements.
+ There were presentation on Airport Policing, Border Force work and the consultation procedures regarding the new master plan.
+ The airport planning manager told the committee that a new aircraft stand, two new coaching gates and a new fire station would be built. The existing fire station garage would be used for office space for operational staff, and a temporary structure would be built to accommodate some fire station equipment until the new station is open. Five de-icer tanks will be installed on the western apron.
+ There were a number of other routine items mentioned concerning such things as aircraft movement numbers, Airport Flyer volumes and Airport Local Community Fund.
As I said at the beginning of this post, very little of real interest in the minutes as much of it was already in the public domain for those interested in finding out.
https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/about-us/who-we-are/airport-consultative-committee/papers
Minutes are now on the airport website and can be read in full at the link at the bottom of this post.
Very little in the minutes of which BRS followers on this website are not already aware. The airport chairman, Janis Kong, was at the meeting in the absence of a chief executive. Nothing was mentioned about a replacement for Robert Sinclair.
The few 'highlights' taken from the minutes are listed below
+ The chairman confirmed that the airport is on track for over 8 mppa this year. Ryanair cancellations had not had a significant effect on the airport. She apologised to members for not keeping them aware of the partial slot co-ordination application. The chairman also gave details of the new shareholders in the airport company.
+ Mention was made of the opening of the enhanced Silver Zone car park.
+ The committee was told of new routes by TUI, easyJet and Ryanair which have been discussed in this forum at various times following the various announcements.
+ There were presentation on Airport Policing, Border Force work and the consultation procedures regarding the new master plan.
+ The airport planning manager told the committee that a new aircraft stand, two new coaching gates and a new fire station would be built. The existing fire station garage would be used for office space for operational staff, and a temporary structure would be built to accommodate some fire station equipment until the new station is open. Five de-icer tanks will be installed on the western apron.
+ There were a number of other routine items mentioned concerning such things as aircraft movement numbers, Airport Flyer volumes and Airport Local Community Fund.
As I said at the beginning of this post, very little of real interest in the minutes as much of it was already in the public domain for those interested in finding out.
https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/about-us/who-we-are/airport-consultative-committee/papers
TheLocalYokel
Honorary Member Of Forums4airports
- Jan 14, 2009
- 16,688
- 343
- IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
- Yes
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #38
Minutes of meeting held on 24 January 2018
https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/about-us/who-we-are/airport-consultative-committee/papers
(click on relevant date under the heading Meeting Minutes)
Not too much of great interest that's not already been made public. Some points I picked out:
+ The appointment of the CEO is imminent and it is hoped that the successful candidate would be in post by the summer.
+ Excellent ASQ (Airport Service Quality) results again.
+ Discussion about the consultation process which is considered to be ambitious in terms of service delivery and sensible in terms of infrastructure and growth. It was emphasised that the three terminals scenarios are illustrative. The draft master plan will make things clearer in terms of the next steps to be taken.
+ There will be planning applications this year seeking to vary part of the 2011 planning permissions. I will copy this part of the minutes verbatim as it appears to indicate further extensions to the existing terminal in tandem with any new master plan decision. I'm not completely sure what they have in mind. .....the 2011 planning permission included the second phase of work to the west and east terminals. After further consideration, it had been agreed that it would be better to extend the terminal to the south rather than the east – this would be subject to a separate planning application later in the year............ Outstanding reserved matters were being prepared including the car hire consolidation centre, the South Side taxi way, aircraft stands on the site of the existing Old Terminal Building and associated acoustic wall. A “look ahead” paper would be prepared for the next meeting to show how these matters would be taken forward.
The car hire situation can be confusing to anyone not familiar with the airport. Europcar, Hertz, Avis, Budget, Alamo, Enterprise, National and Sixt are the eight companies that operate at BRS. Five are based near the new terminal and the other three are situated about 300 metres away near the old terminal.
https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/about-us/who-we-are/airport-consultative-committee/papers
(click on relevant date under the heading Meeting Minutes)
Not too much of great interest that's not already been made public. Some points I picked out:
+ The appointment of the CEO is imminent and it is hoped that the successful candidate would be in post by the summer.
+ Excellent ASQ (Airport Service Quality) results again.
+ Discussion about the consultation process which is considered to be ambitious in terms of service delivery and sensible in terms of infrastructure and growth. It was emphasised that the three terminals scenarios are illustrative. The draft master plan will make things clearer in terms of the next steps to be taken.
+ There will be planning applications this year seeking to vary part of the 2011 planning permissions. I will copy this part of the minutes verbatim as it appears to indicate further extensions to the existing terminal in tandem with any new master plan decision. I'm not completely sure what they have in mind. .....the 2011 planning permission included the second phase of work to the west and east terminals. After further consideration, it had been agreed that it would be better to extend the terminal to the south rather than the east – this would be subject to a separate planning application later in the year............ Outstanding reserved matters were being prepared including the car hire consolidation centre, the South Side taxi way, aircraft stands on the site of the existing Old Terminal Building and associated acoustic wall. A “look ahead” paper would be prepared for the next meeting to show how these matters would be taken forward.
The car hire situation can be confusing to anyone not familiar with the airport. Europcar, Hertz, Avis, Budget, Alamo, Enterprise, National and Sixt are the eight companies that operate at BRS. Five are based near the new terminal and the other three are situated about 300 metres away near the old terminal.
alphagolf
Well-Known Member
Southwards, I could only imagine you could extend into the void between Gates 1 to 4 and the walkway to gates 8-16 and the Central Pier, I don't know how else you could achieve a southern extension.....
Similar threads
Upgrade Your Account
Subscribe to help support your favourite forum and in return we'll remove all our advertisements. Your contribution will help to pay for things like site maintenance, domain name renewals and annual server charges.
Trending Hashtags
-
#BHXWeight: 1
-
#EMAWeight: 1
-
#LBAREGENWeight: 1
-
#David.itlWeight: 1
-
#Lands23RWeight: 1