CAA Provisional Statistics Update

[58terminus]

BHX number 46 in Europe[/Q
Next time a post about the "route development team"or whatever they are called are in China,India.USA etc that is a figure to remember. Maybe concentrating a little closer to home might lift us up the charts.

 

[Coathanger16]

It seems to be our position.

Good result for MAN. LHR must start looking over its shoulder. AMS is booming and I would not be surprised if it is thw one to knock LHR off its throne.

Any airport worth their salt would be looking over their shoulder, but I wouldn't be so sure about AMS - they too are approaching their limit:

“the present system as from 2005 consists of 35 points around Schiphol where the actual noise of passing planes is physically measured and added up to annual totals per point. If a total at a certain point exceeds its legal maximum, the relating runway can no longer be used and traffic should be diverted to alternative runways. The maximum capacity of this system is some 480,000 air traffic movements each year.”

I wonder how much BHX's position may go up over the coming years. We seem to be in the category of airport (10mppa - 20mppa) that's growing the fasted in Europe so lots of competition.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Not all UK airports seem to be shown in these 'league tables'. The same may apply to some mainland Europe airports too.

The number of airports in the league tables also vary according to the timespan in question: the full 2017 year shows 242 airports; the last six months of 2017 shows 245 airports; Quarter 4 of 2017 shows 250 airports; the month of December 2017 shows 252 airports.

Taking the full 2017 year league table, airports such as LTN BFS, LPL, LBA, BHD, CWL, EXT and NQY are not included. This being so the accuracy of the league tables must be called into question as regards some airports' position in the league table.

 

[Kevin Farnell]

Not all UK airports seem to be shown in these 'league tables'. The same may apply to some mainland Europe airports too.

The number of airports in the league tables also vary according to the timespan in question: the full 2017 year shows 242 airports; the last six months of 2017 shows 245 airports; Quarter 4 of 2017 shows 250 airports; the month of December 2017 shows 252 airports.

Taking the full 2017 year league table, airports such as LTN BFS, LPL, LBA, BHD, CWL, EXT and NQY are not included. This being so the accuracy of the league tables must be called into question as regards some airports' position in the league table.

You make an interesting and important point there, TLY!
My first thought, was 'perhaps this was due to incomplete data', as I have seen many CAA reports over the last 12 months or so where figures for a particular airport/airports were missing.
In view of this, I checked my downloaded CAA PDF file for Aug 17 'Table_12_1_Intl_Air_Pax_Traffic_Route_Analysis'. This showed no data for LTN. I then went to the CAA website and looked at the same file. Full data was now available for LTN, but with a footnote saying 'As of 21 December 2017, August tables are complete. Table 12.1 may contain a number of airports marked as ''Unknown''. These are being investigated'.
A footnote for the December figures states 'As of 31 January 2018, the following airports are not yet available for reporting and are therefore excluded: Barra, Belfast City, Benbecula, Bournemouth, Campbeltown, Coventry, Gloucestershire, Islay, Jersey, Kirkwall, Norwich, Oxford, Stornoway, Sumburgh, Tiree and Wick. The next scheduled refresh of airport publications will be 9 February 2018'.
I can only assume that ACI have compiled their statisitics from incomplete data and omitted airports for which data is missing. That begs the question 'is there any point in compiling statistics from incomplete data?'.
As the old adage goes - 'There are lies, damned lies and statistics!'.

Kevin

 

[Brum X]

Only mentioned MAN because they are up there with the big boys !
When they are higher than a lot of capital cities that is major achievement.
People accuse me of being anti MAN but you cannot argue with the facts they have done a great job to get to 19th


y y

But most people on here are aware that MAN is amongst the big boys. It is actually quite irritating when you remind us of that fact.

I think its more the fact that you appear to be abit obsessed with MAN and winding them up.

 

[thunderchild]

But most people on here are aware that MAN is amongst the big boys. It is actually quite irritating when you remind us of that fact.

I think its more the fact that you appear to be abit obsessed with MAN and winding them up.

I think it’s more winding up a certain poster, but let’s be honest he’s done more than his fair share of the same on the BHX pages across numerous forums. But now that he’s gone perhaps it’s best to leave the pettiness to the dried fruit site?

 

[IanFarquharson]

But most people on here are aware that MAN is amongst the big boys. It is actually quite irritating when you remind us of that fact.

I think its more the fact that you appear to be abit obsessed with MAN and winding them up.

I am actually praising Manchester here for being 19th in Europe !
I cant win !
And yes at a BHX fan I have always been jealous of MAN because I feel we should be at their level.
BHX didnt spend for the future year ago and MAN did - simple !

 

[mullion]

The thing is BHX is no closer to catching Manchester than it was in the early 70s

 

[Brum X]

I am actually praising Manchester here for being 19th in Europe !
I cant win !
And yes at a BHX fan I have always been jealous of MAN because I feel we should be at their level.
BHX didnt spend for the future year ago and MAN did - simple !

But i dont really want to know about MAN, this is the BHX thread.

I will leave it there Ian, but if your going to be jealous for the rest of your life and compare BHX and MAN, it aint gonna get any easier.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

You make an interesting and important point there, TLY!
My first thought, was 'perhaps this was due to incomplete data', as I have seen many CAA reports over the last 12 months or so where figures for a particular airport/airports were missing.
In view of this, I checked my downloaded CAA PDF file for Aug 17 'Table_12_1_Intl_Air_Pax_Traffic_Route_Analysis'. This showed no data for LTN. I then went to the CAA website and looked at the same file. Full data was now available for LTN, but with a footnote saying 'As of 21 December 2017, August tables are complete. Table 12.1 may contain a number of airports marked as ''Unknown''. These are being investigated'.
A footnote for the December figures states 'As of 31 January 2018, the following airports are not yet available for reporting and are therefore excluded: Barra, Belfast City, Benbecula, Bournemouth, Campbeltown, Coventry, Gloucestershire, Islay, Jersey, Kirkwall, Norwich, Oxford, Stornoway, Sumburgh, Tiree and Wick. The next scheduled refresh of airport publications will be 9 February 2018'.
I can only assume that ACI have compiled their statisitics from incomplete data and omitted airports for which data is missing. That begs the question 'is there any point in compiling statistics from incomplete data?'.
As the old adage goes - 'There are lies, damned lies and statistics!'.
Kevin

Probably like you I've been following CAA stats for many years and they have never been wholly reliable. Since the revamp of the CAA website a couple of years ago publication of monthly and annual stats has become increasingly delayed and the accuracy has not improved.

Take this example: Table 12.3 Domestic Air Passengers Route Analysis by Each Reporting Airport (for December 2017).

https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles..._Route_Analysis_by_Each_Reporting_Airport.pdf

The route between LGW and EDI shows it carried 57,591 passengers if you look under the LGW section but 57,538 if you look under the EDI section.

Other examples (and there many) include the route between BHX and BFS carrying either 20,679 or 20,581 depending under which reporting airport you look. BRS-GLA shows 23,601 and 23,541. These are relatively small differences but the stats should be identical whichever end of the route is reporting them.

Down the years I've noted numerous instances of clearly incorrect CAA stats that were never corrected, such as in the next paragraph.

The CAA invariably leaves the Bristol-Verona route off its monthly stats in summer but come the end of the year the route is usually included in the annual stats. In 2012 Bristol-Guernsey was missed off CAA stats for much of the year and the annual total came to 6,833 passengers (it's never been corrected). The route that year operated as it had in the years preceding it and the years after it when annual totals were consistently in the range 24,000-28,000.

Bristol Airport always arrives at a different monthly and annual total of passengers carried than the CAA, despite that organisation getting its figures from the airport. In 2017 The airport's annual figure was 8,136,738 and the CAA's 8,234,086. Each month the respective figures vary from between about 6,000 and 10,000. The airport carries a note on its stats page acknowledging the discrepancy which it says is because they record some flights in a different way to the CAA. BRS doesn't count under 2 s for example, but the CAA does, and there are apparently other classes BRS doesn't include although I know not what they are. Most airports like to boast the biggest total they can. BRS is obviously a contrarian airport when it comes to this.

As for the ACI figures, although BOH is one of the absentees from the CAA December 2017 stats, it is included in the ACI stats for December.

Yes, those lies, damned lies and statistics.

 

[Ianbutty]

The

Probably like you I've been following CAA stats for many years and they have never been wholly reliable. Since the revamp of the CAA website a couple of years ago publication of monthly and annual stats has become increasingly delayed and the accuracy has not improved.

Take this example: Table 12.3 Domestic Air Passengers Route Analysis by Each Reporting Airport (for December 2017).

https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles..._Route_Analysis_by_Each_Reporting_Airport.pdf

The route between LGW and EDI shows it carried 57,591 passengers if you look under the LGW section but 57,538 if you look under the EDI section.

Other examples (and there many) include the route between BHX and BFS carrying either 20,679 or 20,581 depending under which reporting airport you look. BRS-GLA shows 23,601 and 23,541. These are relatively small differences but the stats should be identical whichever end of the route is reporting them.

Down the years I've noted numerous instances of clearly incorrect CAA stats that were never corrected, such as in the next paragraph.

The CAA invariably leaves the Bristol-Verona route off its monthly stats in summer but come the end of the year the route is usually included in the annual stats. In 2012 Bristol-Guernsey was missed off CAA stats for much of the year and the annual total came to 6,833 passengers (it's never been corrected). The route that year operated as it had in the years preceding it and the years after it when annual totals were consistently in the range 24,000-28,000.

Bristol Airport always arrives at a different monthly and annual total of passengers carried than the CAA, despite that organisation getting its figures from the airport. In 2017 The airport's annual figure was 8,136,738 and the CAA's 8,234,086. Each month the respective figures vary from between about 6,000 and 10,000. The airport carries a note on its stats page acknowledging the discrepancy which it says is because they record some flights in a different way to the CAA. BRS doesn't count under 2 s for example, but the CAA does, and there are apparently other classes BRS doesn't include although I know not what they are. Most airports like to boast the biggest total they can. BRS is obviously a contrarian airport when it comes to this.

As for the ACI figures, although BOH is one of the absentees from the CAA December 2017 stats, it is included in the ACI stats for December.

Yes, those lies, damned lies and statistics.

The differencea may have something to do with the difference between terminal and transit passengers...I have always taken the CAA stats to be terminal passengers and transit one way only.

Taken from their website:

1) A terminal passenger is a passenger joining or leaving an aircraft at the reporting airport. A passenger travelling between two reporting airports is counted twice, once at each airport. A passenger who changes from one aircraft to another, carrying the same flight number (change of gauge) is treated as a terminal passenger, as is an interlining passenger.

2) A transit passenger is a passenger who arrives at and departs from a reporting airport on the same aircraft which is transiting the airport. Each transit passenger is counted once only and not both on arrival and on departure.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

The differencea may have something to do with the difference between terminal and transit passengers...I have always taken the CAA stats to be terminal passengers and transit one way only.

Taken from their website:

1) A terminal passenger is a passenger joining or leaving an aircraft at the reporting airport. A passenger travelling between two reporting airports is counted twice, once at each airport. A passenger who changes from one aircraft to another, carrying the same flight number (change of gauge) is treated as a terminal passenger, as is an interlining passenger.

2) A transit passenger is a passenger who arrives at and departs from a reporting airport on the same aircraft which is transiting the airport. Each transit passenger is counted once only and not both on arrival and on departure.

Note: This post is basically a discussion on the way the CAA gathers and publishes its passenger stats and doesn't deal solely with BHX. Many members might find the content of little or no interest.

One of the examples I gave of different passenger numbers for the same route was that between BRS and GLA. That route is operated solely by easyJet so there are no transist passengers on it. Both ends show all passengers in December as scheduled passengers so there could not have been a charter aircraft operating, say GLA-BRS-NQY, with some passengers joining at BRS whilst those from GLA remained on the aircraft.

Apart from Table 12.3 where the CAA shows the domestic passnengers for each month as reported by airports at both ends of a route, they also publish Table Table 12.2 which gives the same information but only from one end, in the case of BRS-GLA from the BRS end. This complies with Note 3 on both Tables 12.2 and 12.3 which says this:

(3) To avoid duplication passenger numbers are taken from one reporting airport in the pair. In the case of services at Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, Southend and London City, the London airport's reports are always used. In the case of routes not involving a London airport the passengers are reported by the lower alphabetical airport. Exceptionally where one report of the pair is not a full reporting airport, traffic is derived from the other airport's information, irrespective of alphabetical order.

The obvious question is why bother with 12.3 at all if 12.2 is the one that is used by the CAA?

The 'league table' of airports published each month by the CAA concerns terminal passengers, whether the temporary Airport Statistics Summary which disappears each month when the permanent Table 01, Size of UK Airports, replaces it, but that only shows the rolling 12-month total at each airport to the nearest 1,000.

Table 09, Terminal and Transit Passengers, shows the number of terminal passengers each month at each airport (which should be the same as in the temporary Airport Statistics Summary for those airports that reported in time to be included in this), together with the number of transit passengers, with additional stats for the corresponding month the previous year.

Transit passengers don't amount to much at the UK's reporting airports. In 2016 there was a total of just 138,000 across all airports. The non-reporting airports - Guernsey, Jersey, Isle of Man and Alderney - on the other hand reported a total of 58,000 transist passengers in 2016, although Isle of Man had just 890 and Alderney none.

Sorry to have taken up space and time in the BHX CAA stats thread with this, but as possible discrepancies arose in the European airports' 'league table' that was highlighted in this thread I thought it better to retain the comment here.

 

[smithy108]

January 2018, CAA Airport and route statistics published today on CAA web site. Again Birmingham listed as not yet available. This is poor and sends out the wrong message. We are supposed to be one of the major UK airports and cant get our game together to publish the data.
Next update scheduled 9 March so maybe we will have to wait until then

 

[IanFarquharson]

Expect down 4%

 

[mullion]

It may be that CAA has a query on the figuresand therefore will delay for a few days

 

[Brum X]

Expect down 4%

-4% isnt too bad all things considering.

 

[58terminus]

January 2018, CAA Airport and route statistics published today on CAA web site. Again Birmingham listed as not yet available. This is poor and sends out the wrong message. We are supposed to be one of the major UK airports and cant get our game together to publish the data.
Next update scheduled 9 March so maybe we will have to wait until then

It's interesting that we are now into March and the fact BHX has not published Jan figures has produced very
little if any reaction on the forum.In previous years if they were not available within 7/10 days of a month end people wanted to no why. I guess it is a symptom of a general weariness i detect on the forum with all the bad news.
We really need a good positive announcement to rekindle peoples enthusiasm.

 

[Ianbutty]

We really need a good positive announcement to rekindle peoples enthusiasm.

Apparently the airport is going to be renamed Elmdon. This renaming reflects the age of the technology the airport is using to count the number of passengers. Even better news is that due to on going NOTAMs work, only those aircraft built pre-automated approach capability will be allowed to use the airport such as the Lockheed Constellation, Vickers Viscount, Bristol Britannia and the British Aircraft Corporation 1-11. In addition the airport eill also announce that they are in discussions with a major start up airline for a exciting new service between Plymouth - Gloucester - Coventry - Birmingham - Valley - Blackpool - Barrow - Carlisle.

 

[richard winterbourn]

Interesting developments Ian. I also hear that the stumbling block on the appointment of a new CEO is that they are still looking for a suitable candidate who uses Brylcream and has a handlebar moustache.

 

[CL44]

Apparently the airport is going to be renamed Elmdon. This renaming reflects the age of the technology the airport is using to count the number of passengers. Even better news is that due to on going NOTAMs work, only those aircraft built pre-automated approach capability will be allowed to use the airport such as the Lockheed Constellation, Vickers Viscount, Bristol Britannia and the British Aircraft Corporation 1-11. In addition the airport eill also announce that they are in discussions with a major start up airline for a exciting new service between Plymouth - Gloucester - Coventry - Birmingham - Valley - Blackpool - Barrow - Carlisle.

And how many of us on this Forum would be in the queue with payment in hand ready to fly on one of these services?
I know I would!