Leeds Bradford: General Airport Discussion & Updates

[Bigman]

Just need to extend the M25 from Colne to Wetherby and you have cracked it.

 

[LBA4EVER]

Just need to extend the M25 from Colne to Wetherby and you have cracked it.

M25? Do you mean the m65? Was on the m65 sat eve, you know when your more or less back in yorkshire when the motorway ends!!

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Which I believe most forums members have if they were to run LBA.



It would be ideal for a motorway to be nearby as you have to think about how the freight is being distributed around the UK. EMA as an example is a convenient place as it’s situated to the longest motorway in the UK the M1 and makes it easier for the lorry drivers to get to their destinations. Whereas LBA is in the countryside so can’t see it as being appealing to freight companies.

LBA is about 3/4 of an hour from a motorway so whilst not ideal it's not really that relevant from a freight perspective. All we are talking about is belly hold freight, so its not as if we are going to be having pure freighters or outsize loads. There are other things that are more important. We have to remember that a wide body operator will insist on a cargo handling operation that can facilitate imports and exports but that's all they are interested in- airport to airport. At the moment LBA can't provide that so its a disincentive to new airlines with the ability to carry freight. The airport really need to get their act together on this. No doubt their answer would be to bring in an expensive consultant without any local knowledge or commitment. I am really exasperated they didn't take up my offer to help.

 

[Bigman]

Yes, I meant the M65. God knows where the 2 came from.

 

[Finger66]

Kent I think is where the 2 comes from haha!

 

[airforced]

From my extremely limited knowledge, based on nothing more than a photoshoot I arranged at Luton Airport with a Freight Handling company based there and a DHL freighter many years ago, and my very limited knowledge of LBA (except as a passenger) I would think the main problem would currently be a lack of space and infrastructure. Plus of course the need to spend a considerable amount of money were LBA to decide to go into freight now or even when the new pasenger terminal is built. I have no idea how much money an airport makes from handling freight or what the costs would be to set up such a facility but I imagine those potential constraints would make any airport think twice about the venture unless people were knocking their door down asking for such a facility. I would agree that it would probably be the icing on in terms of revenue generation for the airport if sufficient carriers could be found and the facilities made available but as things stand there seems to be rather too many ifs and buts involved for LBA to actively consider such a move to say nothing of the hours that freighters seem to like.

Maybe LBAYORKIE would be able to put me right on some of the points I have raised and come forward with some reasons why and how LBA should be approaching this. Sorry to have shown my ignorance on this matter.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Any scheduled carrier operating wide bodied aircraft would expect freight facilities as a pre requisite to serving a new destination. So its not a case of choosing whether to provide such facilities or not they will be compelled to provide them.

 

[CM.]

Any scheduled carrier operating wide bodied aircraft would expect freight facilities as a pre requisite to serving a new destination. So its not a case of choosing whether to provide such facilities or not they will be compelled to provide them.

But it’s also having the space for these facilities. If there’s nowhere to put these facilities for freight I don’t know how the airlines expect there to be some.

With regards to widebodies their focus will be on the passengers more than the freight as surely they want to fill the seats up with paying passengers rather than cargo.

 

[White Heather]

Any scheduled carrier operating wide bodied aircraft would expect freight facilities as a pre requisite to serving a new destination. So its not a case of choosing whether to provide such facilities or not they will be compelled to provide them.

The facilities, such as they are, remain in place. They are probably quite poor, but they did the job after a fashion in the past. What there isn't, is a company to operate from them. Since the last company left, LBA claim to have approached several and none are interested, because of the very limited scope for freight at LBA. It would take several airlines with a long term commitment to LBA and a desire to carry freight to persuade them that setting up shop at LBA was a viable investment.
The only other option would be for LBA to operate themselves but they would clearly also need a long term commitment from carriers to go down the road of setting up a freight business, recruiting staff etc. It's no good doing all that only for the airline to then pull the plug on their presence at LBA.
Sadly, it's another 'chicken and egg' situation. If an airline such as Emirates opted to operate from here, carrying freight, and signed a long term contract with LBA, then it would be interesting to see what happens. But with just Jet2, Ryanair and the rest of what we have, it's just not an attractive option apparently.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

The facilities, such as they are, remain in place. They are probably quite poor, but they did the job after a fashion in the past. What there isn't, is a company to operate from them. Since the last company left, LBA claim to have approached several and none are interested, because of the very limited scope for freight at LBA. It would take several airlines with a long term commitment to LBA and a desire to carry freight to persuade them that setting up shop at LBA was a viable investment.
The only other option would be for LBA to operate themselves but they would clearly also need a long term commitment from carriers to go down the road of setting up a freight business, recruiting staff etc. It's no good doing all that only for the airline to then pull the plug on their presence at LBA.
Sadly, it's another 'chicken and egg' situation. If an airline such as Emirates opted to operate from here, carrying freight, and signed a long term contract with LBA, then it would be interesting to see what happens. But with just Jet2, Ryanair and the rest of what we have, it's just not an attractive option apparently.

Re activation of the transit shed is not viable with the current airlines serving LBA as none of them carry cargo. The exception is KLM who could do so but chose not to a long time ago because of the high charges LBA (airport authority) levied. As I said if a wide body operator started to serve LBA, LBA would have no choice but to reactivate the transit shed whether it made a loss for them or not. They don't seem to understand this and probably haven't planned for it but it's important as it will affect their bottom line.

Just to clarify, the way handling works is that LBA charge the airline for taking cargo to and from the aircraft. So in the case of inbound cargo (import) they would charge the airline for taking the cargo to the transit shed. This is the charge KLM baulked at. Once its there the transit shed operator would charge the consignee (importer) for unloading, storing and loading the cargo onto a vehicle once its cleared Customs. LBA would enter into a contract (say 5 year) with the transit shed operator who would be expected to pay LBA for the privilege of operating the transit shed (as well as paying rent) Of course this assumes a 3rd party want to operate the transit shed in the 1st place. In all probability as indicated above LBA would have to operate it at a loss until such time as the number of flights carrying cargo would make it viable. At a rough guess I would say 1 wide body a day would be break even.

The airport need to wake up to cargo processes and procedures but they never had any interest in the past.

 

[White Heather]

Yet again the BBC and specifically, Look North, demonstrated that they are anti LBA, by not only covering the protest outside Leeds Magistrates Court by anti airport protestors who are cross that one of their moronic members is being prosecuted for Criminal Damage (pouring red paint over the Civic Hall steps in protest at the decision to approve the new terminal), but they also again gave air time to Foren, leader of GALBA, who wasted no time again in having his say on the so called expansion of LBA.
Right put me off my tea it did.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

It's because GALBA court the media whereas LBA seem to do the opposite. I am sure if the airport were more forthcoming the BBC would give them airtime too.

 

[White Heather]

It's because GALBA court the media whereas LBA seem to do the opposite. I am sure if the airport were more forthcoming the BBC would give them airtime too.

They say not. They say that the Media are not interested unless it's negative news and not really bothered about any airport good news stories, not that there are many.

 

[A400]

It's because GALBA court the media whereas LBA seem to do the opposite. I am sure if the airport were more forthcoming the BBC would give them airtime too.

The media probably couldn’t handle the pro truths about LBA

Plus they’ve already spoken about the terminal. They don’t want the air time the environmentalists want. They’ve spoken once if those brain dead individuals choose to ignore/twist things than that’s there issue. But if you want the actual facts then listen to the airport.

Tree huggers like being the centre of attention so of course you will see them on the news all the time.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

It's not just the issue of the planning application though, the airport seem happy to exist in their own little Bubble. That's not how it works these days companies are much more involved with their local communities, organising events and sponsoring local organisations such as football teams, carnivals etc. This wins hearts and minds and publicises at the same time, its a form of marketing as well as advertising.

 

[A400]

They can’t be responsible for everything in the community.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

No, but by not interacting they are just making their lives harder.

 

[Aviador]

It's not just the issue of the planning application though, the airport seem happy to exist in their own little Bubble. That's not how it works these days companies are much more involved with their local communities, organising events and sponsoring local organisations such as football teams, carnivals etc. This wins hearts and minds and publicises at the same time, its a form of marketing as well as advertising.

Most other airports do this with community grant schemes.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

You mean exist in a bubble?

 

[LBA4EVER]

Yet again the BBC and specifically, Look North, demonstrated that they are anti LBA, by not only covering the protest outside Leeds Magistrates Court by anti airport protestors who are cross that one of their moronic members is being prosecuted for Criminal Damage (pouring red paint over the Civic Hall steps in protest at the decision to approve the new terminal), but they also again gave air time to Foren, leader of GALBA, who wasted no time again in having his say on the so called expansion of LBA.
Right put me off my tea it did.

Just switch GB news on WH , cancel your tv licence and then when they start threatening you tell them what you think, your reasons! Cant stand the bbc!