Doncaster Sheffield - General Thread

[752]

Doncaster Sheffield Airport "should not reopen" due to climate emergency

Doncaster Sheffield Airport "should not reopen" due to the climate emergency, says a leading spokesman for change.

www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk

as expected on the comments on social media, not gone down well. But then again no criticism towards DSA ever does.

 

[Seasider]

I don't think that there will be any overall increase in flights if DSA reopens as they will be "pinched" from surrounding airports.

 

[White Heather]

Doncaster Sheffield Airport "should not reopen" due to climate emergency

Doncaster Sheffield Airport "should not reopen" due to the climate emergency, says a leading spokesman for change.

www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk

as expected on the comments on social media, not gone down well. But then again no criticism towards DSA ever does.

I think that he has no need to worry about frequent business flying out of a reopened DSA, based on its abject failure previously to hang on to any of the routes the business travellers would use.

It seems the anti airport brigade are working in unison as the idiot who leads the anti airport group at LBA has also come out with a demand that the West Yorkshire Mayor withdraws her support for future growth at LBA for very similar reasons, which of course is a sham as that group is full of NIMBYs who only refer to the environment when it suits them. Its clear NIMBYism is their main focus. Pure selfishness.

 

[752]

As predicated this criticism and a fair point didn’t make it onto Mr Chadwick’s Facebook group as that doesn’t fit the narrative. Like everyone not acknowledging LBAs new terminal, it’s doesn’t fit the narrative for them to mention.

Just him pushing the petition and then telling everyone there is an operator.. well announce it then?

I am struggling to even see what DSA will steal from other airports. Will be interesting to see this play out.

 

[pug]

As predicated this criticism and a fair point didn’t make it onto Mr Chadwick’s Facebook group as that doesn’t fit the narrative. Like everyone not acknowledging LBAs new terminal, it’s doesn’t fit the narrative for them to mention.

Just him pushing the petition and then telling everyone there is an operator.. well announce it then?

I am struggling to even see what DSA will steal from other airports. Will be interesting to see this play out.

Seems that there was a meeting at the airport site today. In attendance was a DSA advocate and transport bod in SY who has posted elsewhere about the challenges over the public subsidy and CAA (not sure why the CAA are a challenge, this wasn’t elaborated on).

Perhaps the impression today was that the SAU findings may not be favourable, otherwise maybe there has been feedback from other airports that there may be legal challenges forthcoming with respect to public subsidy used for a business plan that is quite clear in its intention to redirect routes and flights from other airports?

Basically he’s asking for red tape to be cut in an almost childish fashion whilst also taking aim at people with genuine environmental concerns (not NIMBYS!).

 

[Snackbar]

Seems that there was a meeting at the airport site today. In attendance was a DSA advocate and transport bod in SY who has posted elsewhere about the challenges over the public subsidy and CAA (not sure why the CAA are a challenge, this wasn’t elaborated on).

Perhaps the impression today was that the SAU findings may not be favourable, otherwise maybe there has been feedback from other airports that there may be legal challenges forthcoming with respect to public subsidy used for a business plan that is quite clear in its intention to redirect routes and flights from other airports?

Basically he’s asking for red tape to be cut in an almost childish fashion whilst also taking aim at people with genuine environmental concerns (not NIMBYS!).

I did say so……this is by no means a done and dusted deal….It will be interesting test of the strength of the operator/investor appetite for this airport as these challenges become more acute.

 

[752]

Ahh the irony of Chadwick, on FB asking why the negative comments re DSA and the lack of progress..which the general public are allowed to question, he doesn’t like them, ironic considering when any other airport gets mentioned he lets them gets bashed left right and centre.

That’s right keep promoting the petition because that the only thing of relevance to post.. still these past 2 updates in 2025 there has been well nothing new on the news front.

Backing from the government you say? It’s the airlines you need backing from. And I mean more then TUI.

Quick get DSA open as opposed to LHR 3rd runway so we can get people to Benidorm.. can’t make it up

 

[GolfFox]

Ahh the irony of Chadwick, on FB asking why the negative comments re DSA and the lack of progress..which the general public are allowed to question, he doesn’t like them, ironic considering when any other airport gets mentioned he lets them gets bashed left right and centre.

That’s right keep promoting the petition because that the only thing of relevance to post.. still these past 2 updates in 2025 there has been well nothing new on the news front.

Backing from the government you say? It’s the airlines you need backing from. And I mean more then TUI.

Quick get DSA open as opposed to LHR 3rd runway so we can get people to Benidorm.. can’t make it up

Always going to be an issue when peoples expectations are enhanced by over enthusiastic narrative based upon little knowledge which is then taken as 'gospel'. A more realistic and better informed approach would perhaps have been more appropriate. Those who are interested in the cost of re-opening and viability (rather than flights to Alicante at any cost) are likely to be in for a shock - if indeed CDC actually make it public - which will generate further argument and there is likely to be huge disappointment when TUI don't show up immediately! There was an interesting discussion on another FB page where an argument was made that this has now turned into a political football and even if a deal has been finalised will not be announced until the end of February which it says is the latest time it can be, in time to be considered in the Council and Mayoral elections. This is supported by the article posted on here from 'Now then' magazine.

 

[pug]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6790bdce43f931eea1a34d9c/_____Report_on_the_proposed_subsidy_to_FlyDoncaster_Limited_by_City_of_Doncaster_Council_.pdf

SAU report. Interesting…

They’ve naturally left it quite open ended, but it’s a bit more critical than I expected it to be. I’m surprised Regional and City airports have raised concerns. Currently they own/operate no airports close to DSA. Indeed they were one of the ones I expected would be interested in DSA, clearly not.

Also interesting that they were able to get to two final bidders who both refused to invest. As we suspected, they backed out when they saw what was on ‘offer’ and therefore presumably the reason for the lengthy delays in the tender process.

I’d be interested to see how the Council and SYMCA spin this. SAU haven’t explicitly stated that there would be grounds for legal challenges, but I interpret it that there could be.

What do the rest of you think?

 

[Snackbar]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6790bdce43f931eea1a34d9c/_____Report_on_the_proposed_subsidy_to_FlyDoncaster_Limited_by_City_of_Doncaster_Council_.pdf

SAU report. Interesting…

They’ve naturally left it quite open ended, but it’s a bit more critical than I expected it to be. I’m surprised Regional and City airports have raised concerns. Currently they own/operate no airports close to DSA. Indeed they were one of the ones I expected would be interested in DSA, clearly not.

Also interesting that they were able to get to two final bidders who both refused to invest. As we suspected, they backed out when they saw what was on ‘offer’ and therefore presumably the reason for the lengthy delays in the tender process.

I’d be interested to see how the Council and SYMCA spin this. SAU haven’t explicitly stated that there would be grounds for legal challenges, but I interpret it that there could be.

What do the rest of you think?

It would appear that competitor airports think substantially more investment will be required in order for the airport to stand any chance of being profitable and given it seems private investors aren’t interested it will be more public £s which will be needed. As a result I expect a challenge to be raised under U.K. competition law.
My reading of this report does nothing to inspire any further confidence in its future - more the opposite!

 

[White Heather]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6790bdce43f931eea1a34d9c/_____Report_on_the_proposed_subsidy_to_FlyDoncaster_Limited_by_City_of_Doncaster_Council_.pdf

SAU report. Interesting…

They’ve naturally left it quite open ended, but it’s a bit more critical than I expected it to be. I’m surprised Regional and City airports have raised concerns. Currently they own/operate no airports close to DSA. Indeed they were one of the ones I expected would be interested in DSA, clearly not.

Also interesting that they were able to get to two final bidders who both refused to invest. As we suspected, they backed out when they saw what was on ‘offer’ and therefore presumably the reason for the lengthy delays in the tender process.

I’d be interested to see how the Council and SYMCA spin this. SAU haven’t explicitly stated that there would be grounds for legal challenges, but I interpret it that there could be.

What do the rest of you think?

It's not the easiest report to understand but my take on it is that this report identifies serious failures by the Council relating to several key issues , including ones previously raised in this forum.

The Council need to better explain how they justify baseline passenger figures which are better than DSA has ever previously attracted, and the impact, if a reopened DSA fails to meet these targets.

They also need to better explain the impact on competitor airports and where they get their figures (in terms of passenger figures lost to DSA from competing airports) from.

There are other areas that need clarification too and the summary suggests that the submission made has perhaps skirted around some key areas, notably, what happens if the airport fails to attract the predicted business and how repayments are then impacted.

This would all appear to leave Doncaster Council with several awkward questions to answer. One would suspect they don't have the answers to hand or do, but didnt want to draw attention to them, otherwise, why not include these details in the first place,?

One thing I found interesting is the admission that without the subsidy, DSA will not reopen. Also, that previous market tenders led to nothing as the risk was too great for private investment. If ever there was an admission that the airport is NOT viable, there it is. Yet, it seems clear that the Council have not seen fit to say what happens if their DSA mk2 fails and how the financial arrangements will be impacted. As they have all along, they seem to be simply refusing to consider reality. Heads in the sand. Arguably, reckless use of millions of public money.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

For the record. 'Bid to find private operator fails'

Yorkshire Post

An alternative plan for a new council-owned company to run the site would be backed by £105m of public cash, The Yorkshire Post can reveal.

www.facebook.com

 

[pug]

It's not the easiest report to understand but my take on it is that this report identifies serious failures by the Council relating to several key issues , including ones previously raised in this forum.

The Council need to better explain how they justify baseline passenger figures which are better than DSA has ever previously attracted, and the impact of a reopened DSA fails to meet these targets.

They also need to better explain the impact on competitor airports and where they get their figures (in terms of passenger figures lost to DSA from competing airports) from.

There are other areas that need clarification too and the summary suggests that the submission made has perhaps skirted around some key areas, notably, what happens if the airport fails to attract the predicted business and how repayments are then impacted.

This would all appear to leave Doncaster Council with several awkward questions to answer. One would suspect they don't have the answers to hand or do, but didnt want to draw attention to them, otherwise, why not include these details in the first place,?

One thing I found interesting is the admission that without the subsidy, DSA will not reopen. Also, that previous market tenders led to nothing as the risk was too great for private investment. If ever there was an admission that the airport is NOT viable, there it is. Yet, it seems clear that the Council have not seen fit to say what happens if their DSA mk2 fails and how the financial arrangements will be impacted. As they have all along, they seem to be simply refusing to consider reality. Heads in the sand. Arguably, reckless use of millions of public money.

Interestingly they have questioned the deferment of loan repayments to Y10 which suggests the Council want to give a false positive financial performance in the first ten years - y’know like what they tried to do up the road in Teesside recently? ‘It would be profitable if we didn’t have stuff to pay for’.

They question that is the airport us expected to be financially self sustaining by Y5, why do they need such a long deferment period?

Still keen to know why RCA have given input. I expect it’s because they know that it’s not just local airports that are competing for traffic but nationally regional airports compete with each other for limited airline resources. When Jet2 announced a base at BOH it was probably at the expense of another airport they may have been talking to.

 

[Snackbar]

It would appear that competitor airports think substantially more investment will be required in order for the airport to stand any chance of being profitable and given it seems private investors aren’t interested it will be more public £s which will be needed. As a result I expect a challenge to be raised under U.K. competition law.
My reading of this report does nothing to inspire any further confidence in its future - more the opposite!

Just an add - it would also suggest DSA will struggle to gain investment going forward - how on earth do they intend to fund the obvious investment which would be needed to expand the terminal etc to handle the passenger numbers that would be required to make it profitable?? This is more looking like a re-run of Teesside then the airport metropolis that the council touted at the start of all this!
Seems Peel have been vindicated…..

 

[752]

So I am reading this correctly, no private investor interested? 2 have pulled out? So left with nothing? Ironic mark chadwick has been adamant there is one and secured?

Using public money to get revive the dead duck and airlines not offering anything more then previous.. what is the point

 

[White Heather]

So I am reading this correctly, no private investor interested? 2 have pulled out? So left with nothing? Ironic mark chadwick has been adamant there is one and secured?

Using public money to get revive the dead duck and airlines not offering anything more then previous.. what is the point

Seems that way. No private airport investor, so the Council set up their own company, who will seek to find an operator, tempted by huge subsidies and not paying a penny back for 10 years, with the subsidies effectively given to the Council owned company by the Council/South Yorkshire Mayor.

No wonder self sufficient airports won't be happy.about it. I wonder what the South Yorkshire Mayor will make of this report, given the fact its littered with not so subtle criticisms? Seems to me that things are not going well and the pressure is mounting.

 

[752]

Seems that way. No private airport investor, so the Council set up their own company, who will seek to find an operator, tempted by huge subsidies and not paying a penny back for 10 years, with the subsidies effectively given to the Council owned company by the Council/South Yorkshire Mayor.

No wonder self sufficient airports won't be happy.about it. I wonder what the South Yorkshire Mayor will make of this report, given the fact its littered with not so subtle criticisms? Seems to me that things are not going well and the pressure is mounting.

Then what after 10 years when there is no profit still and the airport scrapping 1m pax per year if that?

So in other words the council are in too deep, pressured to intervene in the airport closure with confidence and operator will jump on the chance, however its exact opposite and now they are left with a huge lump of tax payers money to stump up, just to get TUI to Alicante back.. right.

 

[Crashgate]

Ouch, that report is an interesting read. Wonder if the board meeting of the SYMCA on the 11th Feb will still be seeing the funding decision made.
https://governance.southyorkshire-ca.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=11641&Opt=0

 

[Stagman]

No one has anything to recoup when it goes belly up as keys just handed back to Peel. So any money sunk into the project won't be recouped.

Now if Council or Operator purchased the full freehold of the site, then some money could be recouped if it failed.

But since it is leasehold, then any sums don't stack up as no collateral.

Council have really mucked it up in a big way by not going after purchase option.

It may have been more enticing to operators to come on board if the Council had purchased and operators were given shareholding in the company. But since that hasn't happened the operators have not jumped on board.

 

[pug]

Ouch, that report is an interesting read. Wonder if the board meeting of the SYMCA on the 11th Feb will still be seeing the funding decision made.
https://governance.southyorkshire-ca.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=11641&Opt=0

Mark Chadwick has posted this;

Great news today another milestone achieved with the government Subsidy Advisory Unit.

Some positive feedback in relation to the Subsidy proposed to FlyDoncaster.

The new company that's been set up to manage the project.

As far as I am aware, the next stage is to agree the release of gainshare funds from SYMCA.

Im told that City of Doncaster Council has there Full Council meeting tomorrow and an update from Mayor Ros is expected.

It's been reported in the Yorkshire Post today
and perhaps the YP is trying to sell newspapers
That's there job honestly though !!

let's use a headline that perhaps doesn't quite ring true to cause a fuss and sell some news papers.

One last thing even with the controversial headline used by the Yorkshire Post

They still have a soon to be announced international operator for the day to day running of our airport.

#SaveDSA #saveDSAairspace #syorksairportcity ✈️

Is he reading the same report as everyone else or is he being fed from elsewhere?