A new airport.... South Yorkshire Airport City?

Doncaster Sheffield Airport Strategic Review Announcement​

Forums4airports discusses the latest press release from Doncaster Sheffield airport where the airport questions the future of the airport. The owners of the airport, the Peel Group have announced they are looking at their options as the group has decided the airport is no longer viable as an operational airport. Here's the press release:

"The Board of Doncaster Sheffield Airport (DSA) has begun a review of strategic options for the Airport. This review follows lengthy deliberations by the Board of DSA which has reluctantly concluded that aviation activity on the site may no longer be commercially viable.

DSA’s owner, the Peel Group, as the Airport’s principal funder, has reviewed the conclusions of the Board of DSA and commissioned external independent advice in order to evaluate and test the conclusions drawn, which concurs with the Board’s initial findings.

Since the Peel Group acquired the Airport site in 1999 and converted it into an international commercial airport, which opened in 2005, significant amounts have been invested in the terminal, the airfield and its operations, both in relation to the original conversion and subsequently to improve the facilities and infrastructure on offer to create an award winning airport.

However, despite growth in passenger numbers, DSA has never achieved the critical mass required to become profitable and this fundamental issue of a shortfall in passenger numbers is exacerbated by the announcement on 10 June 2022 of the unilateral withdrawal of the Wizz Air based aircraft, leaving the Airport with only one base carrier, namely TUI.

This challenge has been increased by other changes in the aviation market, the well-publicised impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and increasingly important environmental considerations. It has therefore been concluded that aviation activity may no longer be the use for the site which delivers the maximum economic and environmental benefit to the region. Against this backdrop, DSA and the Peel Group, will initiate a consultation and engagement programme with stakeholders on the future of the site and how best to maximise and capitalise on future economic growth opportunities for Doncaster and the wider Sheffield City Region.

The wider Peel Group is already delivering significant development and business opportunities on its adjoining GatewayEast development including the recent deal for over 400,000 sq ft logistics and advanced manufacturing development on site, creating hundreds of new jobs and delivering further economic investment in the region.

Robert Hough, Chairman of Peel Airports Group, which includes Doncaster Sheffield Airport, said: “It is a critical time for aviation globally. Despite pandemic related travel restrictions slowly drawing to a close, we are still facing ongoing obstacles and dynamic long-term threats to the future of the aviation industry. The actions by Wizz to sacrifice its base at Doncaster to shore up its business opportunities at other bases in the South of England are a significant blow for the Airport.

Now is the right time to review how DSA can best create future growth opportunities for Doncaster and for South Yorkshire. The Peel Group remains committed to delivering economic growth, job opportunities and prosperity for Doncaster and the wider region.”

DSA and the Peel Group pride themselves on being forward-thinking whilst prioritising the welfare of staff and customers alike. As such, no further public comments will be made whilst they undertake this engagement period with all stakeholders.
During the Strategic Review, the Airport will operate as normal. Therefore passengers who are due to travel to the airport, please arrive and check in as normal. If there are any disruptions with your flight, you will be contacted by your airline in good time.
For all press enquiries, please contact Charlotte Leach at [email protected]."

"Not great news for DSA or the region"

Should the government or local council foot the bill and provide a financial subsidy to keep the airport open, thoughts...?

 

It was only the 727's & Coastguard fleets that were at DSA plus the office.

What the talk has been that they will want to bring up their MRO operation from Lasham plus the defence operation. So that would give them a bigger operation at DSA than previously was, thus would bring in greater revenues with operations. But would this be realistic proposition.

Not sure about realistic, but definitely a big risk if they did, and probably still knowhere near enough .

 

Another LinkedIn post so I can’t share the link, but the thoughts of the President of the Sheffield Chamber of Commerce. Very well written and I think fair assessment.

Thoughts on 1 airport, £160m and ripple effects.

Devolution was always about giving local leaders the tools to make the big decisions that shape economies. Kudos to our local political leaders in South Yorkshire for not ducking that challenge. The unanimous decision to invest £160m of public money to reopen Doncaster Sheffield Airport don’t come much bigger. To lead is to choose.

Congratulations also to those who have fought hard for this; especially Save Doncaster Sheffield Airport, Dan Fell MBE and Peter Kennan. Consistent from the start.

Despite being President of Sheffield Chamber of Commerce I’ve intentionally stepped back from offering views as this debate has evolved. Chambers rarely have structures to speak confidently on behalf of their members. I’m also allergic to complex debates boiled down to polarised sound bites. For me it’s neither yay nor nay.

Rather it’s what are the ripple effects? The opportunity costs. The funding pot this money is coming from is finite. The demands on this pot are arguably infinite after decades of under investment across our region.

Are we now ready to have the conversations about what we’re unlikely to fund now we have bet big on the airport? Without that conversation do we store up frustrations for later across communities? Communities which are home to people who may never visit nor feel the impact of an airport.

I thought that earlier this week when chairing a meeting of the Gleadless Valley Regeneration Board. Ironically at the same time others were meeting in an aircraft hangar. We were debating how to cobble together a few hundred pounds to fund skips to clear up flytipping that blights so many.

So with the £160m committed are we ready for the effort that is yet to come? The outpouring of delight and the proclamation of this being amazing news feels a bit like a bandwagon but it arguably misses the point.

We’ve simply got to the start line. We’ve laced our shoes. You don’t see marathon runners high fiving each other at the start. You see many people lost in their thoughts. What have I done? This is going to be tough.

So godspeed to all those who will now run the race to reopen the airport and deliver all those jobs that have been promised.

If we don’t get this right we might reflect on this decision differently in the future. We will likely unleash huge frustration.

How to get this right? I’ve no idea. I have zero expertise in running airports. Let’s hope others in the region really do. But here is one thought.

For me I’d like to see the Chambers in South Yorkshire come together to play one simple public role. Draw together world class expertise. Pay them if necessary to ask the tough and uncomfortable questions so this investment pays dividends. Someone has to.

Contrary to many statements on here and in the press, longterm success isn’t guaranteed and bandwagons often end up careering over cliffs.

 

At least they lnow their place unlike Coppard and the mechanic, hard questions will just ne dismissed by Mayor Coppard just as they were when 3 public questions were posed on the day.

 

Another LinkedIn post so I can’t share the link, but the thoughts of the President of the Sheffield Chamber of Commerce. Very well written and I think fair assessment.

Agree - that's a very balanced and objective piece! Somehow one feels that a decision (whichever way) if it had been taken by this gentleman would have been more credible. He is perceptive and clearly realises that the awkward questions have been dismissed or hidden from public view. Peter Kennan's views were copied and pasted by @rabbitfoot in a post earlier in the thread including pressing on with a rail station - not clear which one (Lincoln or ECMN) but that does seem very premature. Perhaps there is enough speculative investment for the moment??

 

Agree - that's a very balanced and objective piece! Somehow one feels that a decision (whichever way) if it had been taken by this gentleman would have been more credible. He is perceptive and clearly realises that the awkward questions have been dismissed or hidden from public view. Peter Kennan's views were copied and pasted by @rabbitfoot in a post earlier in the thread including pressing on with a rail station - not clear which one (Lincoln or ECMN) but that does seem very premature. Perhaps there is enough speculative investment for the moment??

Kennan has some over optimistic, some might say grandiose, belief in what DSA could be capable of. He’s very much a believer in DSA being the global gateway that rivals MAN. A rail link would take years of planning, I also seem to recall that the TOCs had shown resistance to the plans when they were proposed in the late 2010’s during the feasibility study because it would have resulted in n network disruption. Imagine having a rail link to an airport that serves less than 2mppa. Unless it was sold as a gateway to London like some kind of park and ride facility to avoid heading into Doncaster to catch the train then I can’t see that it would ever offer value for money. It’s also questionable as to whether having a rail link would have the desired affect of displacing traffic from London, we have Birmingham trying to do the same but it hasn’t worked in respect of increasing the long haul route network from there.

Kennan was recently seen posting about how the airport could be the home of (insert whatever soundbite that sounds good at the moment) manufacturing and testing. Latest seems to be the drone defence technology. What’s he suggesting, that DSA becomes the UKs answer to Groom Lake?

Rather than what ifs, the airport needs a clear and simple strategy. I have no doubt that the people they’ve got working behind the scenes are working on that simple strategy, but it probably doesn’t look anywhere near as good as what these politicians and their hangers on are pontificating about in public. I like the SCoC presidents analogy though, you don’t celebrate and congratulate yourself when you’ve tied your shoe laces at the start of a marathon, particularly if you’ve entered yourself in the race backed by money that was handed to you on a plate! That’s just political show boating and not a sign of an investment come good.

I have noted a former airline MD and current employee of a major airline has commented that this is a vanity project, that airlines will need assurances and losses underwriting and that it will only result in the displacement of passengers from other airports even if they’re successful. Their comment has been ‘liked’ by an aviation strategy consultant. You can add that to the only other aviation related comments that are to the negative. Only positive comments I’ve seen are from people involved in the project from an aviation perspective. Interesting.

 

Another LinkedIn post so I can’t share the link, but the thoughts of the President of the Sheffield Chamber of Commerce. Very well written and I think fair assessment.

Some common sense! I live about 3 miles from the airport. Would I use the airport? Of course, if the flight was there to use and I would probably pay a bit more for the convenience. Will I fly from it more than once a year? No! Will anyone on Chadwick’s Facebook page fly from it more than once a year? Not many I would say and that makes his 33,000 followers non sensical, especially given how frequently they would have to fly from the airport to make it break even. Ignoring the likely need for more funding later, I can’t help but hold my head in my hands at the thought that the entirety of Doncaster’s gainshare funding will be used up in this. I am no proud Doncaster resident and I live in a nice area, but there is so much need in this town elsewhere and so much poverty. The roads are abysmal - I travel the country with work and with the exception of London, Doncaster’s roads are in a terrible condition. I have this overwhelming feeling that this huge waste of money is simply a selfish waste by the self indulgent who seem to think having to drive 50 miles to East Midlands is a chore. Very typical of the attitude in this town that people are owed everything for nothing in return. The politicians in turn are putting party first and there is no finer example than Ros Jones’ slim win this year, which really is fraudulent given it was peddles on telling the masses that passenger flights would start 2026. I would love to see the airport successful and if it is then I will happily eat my words, but what about all the projects that will not be able to happen now? At the vote the Barnsley mayor actually sniggered and made reference to being unsure of any benefit to Barnsley but that given it was CDC’s gainshare risk and no risk to Barnsley he would vote for it. Says it all really doesn’t it? As for Peter Kennan, don’t get me started, he’s an accountant and has some belief that the modern aviation markets mimic that of historic railways. Like so many of world events a the moment, I can’t quite believe my eyes and ears.

 

@Dsa-Realist that’s an interesting reaction from the Barnsley Mayor if that is what happened. CDC knew there would be no regional buy in if they were expected to share the burden, that’s why they came up with the proposal to take it on themselves.

Obviously in the interests of the tax payers in Doncaster, some of whom are friends of mine, I hope that they don’t end up out of pocket. But this assumption that airports are vital economic drivers is objectively incorrect. They’re facilitators first, and only really become drivers themselves once there is the economic prosperity to serve in the first place. I’d say it’s the equivalent of making a horse shoe for a horse that hasn’t been born yet, but actually in this instance it’s like putting a horse shoe on a dead horse in the hope that you might be able to bring the horse back to life at some point in the future.

The pragmatic solution would be to reopen the airport to only 2Excel and other non commercial traffic like what they’ve done at Leeds East. 2excel clearly have plans and they should be supported, but they’re deliverable at a fraction of the cost of the current proposal. I’m sure the terminal could be mothballed until there is a man indicator that there is more concrete demand, it might result in a cost but it would be a manageable cost that accommodates known demand for the airfield without the significant risk of committing the full lot on a gamble that is unlikely to pay off. Coppard was asked whether this would be an option and it was dismissed out of hand through fear of damaging confidence, and presumably because they’ve made promises to see holiday flights return to keep the proles happy. I feel this might be a fatal error of judgement.

 

Firstly, Sheffield maybe the biggest city without an airport, but it has 3 within an hours drive. What stops the next largest city without one now demanding that they should have one? As it is, the UK actually has far too many airports for the amount of journeys made. Although aviation is currently growing, there are some very strong headwinds with the economy and I’d expect a large contraction to happen in the near future.

Secondly, please feel free to explain how Teesside is profitable and doing well? Last check it was still massively in debt to money loaned by the taxpayer and was still found to be making a loss (even if the mayor attempted to pull the wool). It’s been discussed on here at great length around the extents Peel went to try and make DSA work, especially as it was in there interest. Stop believing the lies and myths peddled by a mechanic and politicians. Peel may have closed the airport but not without good reason and not without many years of throwing the kitchen sink at it to make it viable. As mentioned above, please feel free to explain what CDC/SYMCA will do differently this time?

As for the rest about private and public sector, well I’m not even sure that’s worth answering. I hope you are looking forward to your council tax shooting up and being stuck with a millstone round South Yorkshire’s neck. If your so against private sector investment, you probably won’t want any of the inward private investment for the region that Coppard hopes this generates?

"Firstly, Sheffield maybe the biggest city without an airport, but it has 3 within an hours drive."
Who the hell wants to drive to an airport and have the hassle and extra expense of parking? Public transport access is what matters. Even if you get a minicab, access to LBA is crap - it's on the wrong side of Leeds and the roads around the airport are very slow unless you go at 3 a.m. or on a Sunday. MAN is on the wrong side of the hills, and I wonder whether some poor soul has had to navigate the Snake Pass when the weather is closing in and they've a plane to catch. EMA is accessible I guess, though I dread to think how much an Uber would be from Sheffield. Probably cheaper to take the car and pay out to park.

"What stops the next largest city without one now demanding that they should have one?".
Going on conurbation sizes, that would be Leicester. They have easy access to both EMA and BHX, as well as their own General Aviation airport to the East of the city. I don't think anybody has seriously pushed for it to be used for commercial aviation.

"As it is, the UK actually has far too many airports for the amount of journeys made."
Like to support that assertion at all? Like with some stats? Anything?

"Although aviation is currently growing, there are some very strong headwinds with the economy and I’d expect a large contraction to happen in the near future."
Haven't seen this, then? https://www.ainvest.com/news/uk-reg...gic-bet-post-pandemic-aviation-recovery-2508/

"Secondly, please feel free to explain how Teesside is profitable and doing well? Last check it was still massively in debt to money loaned by the taxpayer and was still found to be making a loss (even if the mayor attempted to pull the wool)."
As others have pointed out, I never said MME was running at a profit.

"It’s been discussed on here at great length around the extents Peel went to try and make DSA work, especially as it was in there interest. Stop believing the lies and myths peddled by a mechanic and politicians. Peel may have closed the airport but not without good reason and not without many years of throwing the kitchen sink at it to make it viable."
Messed up with Wizz Air though, didn't they? I see LPL, successful though it is, doesn't host Wizz Air.

"As mentioned above, please feel free to explain what CDC/SYMCA will do differently this time?"
Well I'm not a mind-reader. Maybe talk to and listen to their customers? Maybe let Munich Airport International take the important decisions?

"As for the rest about private and public sector, well I’m not even sure that’s worth answering. I hope you are looking forward to your council tax shooting up and being stuck with a millstone round South Yorkshire’s neck. If your so against private sector investment, you probably won’t want any of the inward private investment for the region that Coppard hopes this generates?"

Hey, I'm not against inward investment from the private sector. How much inward investment is the airport currently generating?

What does p#ss me off is the growth of the neo-liberal wet dream - the private monopoly. Many have now been created as a long term legacy of the Thatcher sell-offs. You mention SY council tax shooting up - I don't live in South Yorkshire but if it's anything like the West Midlands, Council Tax would have to go up a long way to match the proportional increases people have seen to Water Rates in the last few years. You know, the ones they're paying to Yorkshire Water to improve the system which has gone downhill while they (YW) paid their shareholders and chief execs over the odds.

Too many of these private monopolies have become too big to fail, as well. cf Thames Water. Privatise profit, socialise loss. If some entrepreneur wants to come to South Yorkshire and open a factory making widgets, great. Same with service industries. If it fails, it will mean job losses, which will be disappointing, but it won't take down the whole economy of the region.

CDC and SYMCA are looking at Gross Value Added to the local economy. LBA, to take an example, couldn't give a stuff about LVA - it's owned by an Australian investment company. If DSA makes no money at all, but it generates millions for the local economy, then that translates to more income in local business rates for the CDC/SYMCA. These things matter for the people who will (or won't) vote them back in.

 

@Qing4theloo your post I’d constructed in such a way that it’s hard to break it down into its parts.

What @Speedbird1 is saying is that commercially there are too many airports to cater to the demand that is inherently finite. It’s a big job to provide stats as detailed as you’re requesting but the information is available. The CAA do report airport statistics usually on the 16th of the month. There is also some government analysis that isn’t hidden behind a paywall.

Transport Statistics Great Britain: 2023 International Travel

www.gov.uk

You can of course make the argument that the public sector should provide airport infrastructure using performance metrics that aren’t restricted to simple profit/loss that you believe hold back airport development in this country. Inherently i agree with you on this, I fully believe that the U.K. Governments of the 1950’s and 60’s should have implemented a proper national airport framework that resulted in fewer, strategically located airports that served larger population catchments and prevented inter-regional competition. This did not occur, and so we can only work with what we’ve go. What we have got is a commercially, profit driven network of airports where some perform better (The London airports, Manchester etc) and others that fight over the same limited number of passengers (CWL vs BRS, NCL vs MME, LBA vs DSA etc).

The other point, and one which you’ve chosen to ignore, is that even with publicly owned airports, airlines are exclusively privately owned, profit driven and ruthless enterprises. As DSA 1.0 shows, you can throw any number of incentives and financial sweeteners at airlines but if the passengers don’t materialise the airlines will not stay, they can’t afford to. They go to where they know they’ll make a profit and therefore the risk to which they’re very averse is mitigated. DSA is a high risk proposition for airlines.

You then mention the GVA aspect. Also fair enough in isolation, but they’ve not contextualised this. Their own GVA estimates from when the airport closed were dwarfed by an industrial estate in Thorne. This then begs the question as to whether this is a viable and justifiable use of public funding. One could argue that there is a place for public investment in transport infrastructure of this type, but there is around 40 miles that separates Sheffield from Manchester, and despite your suggestions that people don’t want to continue using Manchester it’s a fact that 3 million people went/from South Yorkshire to Manchester Airport per year during the 17 years that DSA was open. Clearly the suggestion that people don’t want to make that journey is at odds with reality. It also shows that there is a large (but fragmented on an ultimate destination basis) market to serve which justifies investment in improving access to Manchester Airport.

 

@Qing4theloo your post I’d constructed in such a way that it’s hard to break it down into its parts.

Yeah, I'm still figuring out how to just quote small bits of someone's post. Think maybe I've got it now.

The other point, and one which you’ve chosen to ignore, is that even with publicly owned airports, airlines are exclusively privately owned, profit driven and ruthless enterprises. As DSA 1.0 shows, you can throw any number of incentives and financial sweeteners at airlines but if the passengers don’t materialise the airlines will not stay, they can’t afford to. They go to where they know they’ll make a profit and therefore the risk to which they’re very averse is mitigated. DSA is a high risk proposition for airlines.

Yeah, I get this. Airlines don't seem to be bothered who runs the airport, though. KLM are still flying from MME and even Kirmington (how on earth are they still going? Money from the helicopter flights to oil rigs?)

 

Yeah, I'm still figuring out how to just quote small bits of someone's post. Think maybe I've got it now.




Yeah, I get this. Airlines don't seem to be bothered who runs the airport, though. KLM are still flying from MME and even Kirmington (how on earth are they still going? Money from the helicopter flights to oil rigs?)

They aren’t bothered about who runs the airport, their sole concern is can they make a profit by flying from DSA or will they be dragged over the coals by the shareholders (and in some cases the city) for making questionable or even poor strategic decisions. I think this is part of the reason that we rarely see bold moves into new markets now, because airlines are under immense scrutiny particularly when they’re in the pockets of the banks that have financed aircraft orders! Nobody can avoid the fact that DSA sits right in the over lap of three to four airline catchment areas and the number of passengers from South Yorkshire isn’t significant but nonetheless could be the difference between profit and loss at those other airport. There’s no compelling argument for leaving the other airports and centralising at DSA. Easyjet could do this, but it remains to be seen whether they will after their previous experience at DSA and it’s clear theyre currently making inroads at LBA.

Re. HUY, that is sustained by the offshore sector that pays well for location. It’s ignored the low cost airlines partly due to competition from DSA but also due to the fact that they would drive a hard bargain and the cost of hosting them would probably outweigh any revenue they could make from doing so. The KLM does well because of the industry in the region, lots of ship changeovers every day, the petro chemical industry and also factor in that they have at least an extra hour to travel to an alternative airport than industries in Sheffield so naturally the service commands higher fares. It is quite operationally efficient too.

 

"Firstly, Sheffield maybe the biggest city without an airport, but it has 3 within an hours drive."
Who the hell wants to drive to an airport and have the hassle and extra expense of parking? Public transport access is what matters. Even if you get a minicab, access to LBA is crap - it's on the wrong side of Leeds and the roads around the airport are very slow unless you go at 3 a.m. or on a Sunday. MAN is on the wrong side of the hills, and I wonder whether some poor soul has had to navigate the Snake Pass when the weather is closing in and they've a plane to catch. EMA is accessible I guess, though I dread to think how much an Uber would be from Sheffield. Probably cheaper to take the car and pay out to park.

"What stops the next largest city without one now demanding that they should have one?".
Going on conurbation sizes, that would be Leicester. They have easy access to both EMA and BHX, as well as their own General Aviation airport to the East of the city. I don't think anybody has seriously pushed for it to be used for commercial aviation.

"As it is, the UK actually has far too many airports for the amount of journeys made."
Like to support that assertion at all? Like with some stats? Anything?

"Although aviation is currently growing, there are some very strong headwinds with the economy and I’d expect a large contraction to happen in the near future."
Haven't seen this, then? https://www.ainvest.com/news/uk-reg...gic-bet-post-pandemic-aviation-recovery-2508/

"Secondly, please feel free to explain how Teesside is profitable and doing well? Last check it was still massively in debt to money loaned by the taxpayer and was still found to be making a loss (even if the mayor attempted to pull the wool)."
As others have pointed out, I never said MME was running at a profit.

"It’s been discussed on here at great length around the extents Peel went to try and make DSA work, especially as it was in there interest. Stop believing the lies and myths peddled by a mechanic and politicians. Peel may have closed the airport but not without good reason and not without many years of throwing the kitchen sink at it to make it viable."
Messed up with Wizz Air though, didn't they? I see LPL, successful though it is, doesn't host Wizz Air.

"As mentioned above, please feel free to explain what CDC/SYMCA will do differently this time?"
Well I'm not a mind-reader. Maybe talk to and listen to their customers? Maybe let Munich Airport International take the important decisions?

"As for the rest about private and public sector, well I’m not even sure that’s worth answering. I hope you are looking forward to your council tax shooting up and being stuck with a millstone round South Yorkshire’s neck. If your so against private sector investment, you probably won’t want any of the inward private investment for the region that Coppard hopes this generates?"

Hey, I'm not against inward investment from the private sector. How much inward investment is the airport currently generating?

What does p#ss me off is the growth of the neo-liberal wet dream - the private monopoly. Many have now been created as a long term legacy of the Thatcher sell-offs. You mention SY council tax shooting up - I don't live in South Yorkshire but if it's anything like the West Midlands, Council Tax would have to go up a long way to match the proportional increases people have seen to Water Rates in the last few years. You know, the ones they're paying to Yorkshire Water to improve the system which has gone downhill while they (YW) paid their shareholders and chief execs over the odds.

Too many of these private monopolies have become too big to fail, as well. cf Thames Water. Privatise profit, socialise loss. If some entrepreneur wants to come to South Yorkshire and open a factory making widgets, great. Same with service industries. If it fails, it will mean job losses, which will be disappointing, but it won't take down the whole economy of the region.

CDC and SYMCA are looking at Gross Value Added to the local economy. LBA, to take an example, couldn't give a stuff about LVA - it's owned by an Australian investment company. If DSA makes no money at all, but it generates millions for the local economy, then that translates to more income in local business rates for the CDC/SYMCA. These things matter for the people who will (or won't) vote them back in.

You have answered in the very first paragraph why DSA will fail. One of, if not the actual largest revenue earner for airports is from car parking. If passengers use public transport or even taxis, then revenue streams won’t be there and the airport will very quickly close again. I believe @pug has already answered the part about Manchester so I’ll leave that one there.

Take a look at Jet2 cutting winter capacity recently and noting difficult trading conditions. There are real and difficult times ahead for the industry. The whole economy is feeling it. 0% growth in July announced this morning shows just that. There is a very real risk that we could see a recession within the next 12 months. If so, aviation will have very limited, if not no growth during this period. I certainly wouldnt want to be gambling with opening an airport during this period if it comes to fruition.

Wizz do fly from Liverpool so not sure what you are on about there? They have done successfully for many years. Proof that any issues with Wizz and DSA were not Peel related but just purely the fact they didn’t have the revenue or bookings they wanted to make DSA profitable.

How do you know DSA 1.0 didn’t listen to its customers? There were some incredibly knowledgeable and respected management there who have gone on to successful senior roles elsewhere, including LBA. The failure of DSA was nothing to do with a lack of trying as has been pointed out on here many times. Airlines simply couldn’t make the economics of flying there work as the market isn’t there and the wider areas are more willing to travel to the likes of EMA, LBA and MAN.

 

Kennan has some over optimistic, some might say grandiose, belief in what DSA could be capable of. He’s very much a believer in DSA being the global gateway that rivals MAN. A rail link would take years of planning, I also seem to recall that the TOCs had shown resistance to the plans when they were proposed in the late 2010’s during the feasibility study because it would have resulted in n network disruption. Imagine having a rail link to an airport that serves less than 2mppa. Unless it was sold as a gateway to London like some kind of park and ride facility to avoid heading into Doncaster to catch the train then I can’t see that it would ever offer value for money. It’s also questionable as to whether having a rail link would have the desired affect of displacing traffic from London, we have Birmingham trying to do the same but it hasn’t worked in respect of increasing the long haul route network from there.

Kennan was recently seen posting about how the airport could be the home of (insert whatever soundbite that sounds good at the moment) manufacturing and testing. Latest seems to be the drone defence technology. What’s he suggesting, that DSA becomes the UKs answer to Groom Lake?

Rather than what ifs, the airport needs a clear and simple strategy. I have no doubt that the people they’ve got working behind the scenes are working on that simple strategy, but it probably doesn’t look anywhere near as good as what these politicians and their hangers on are pontificating about in public. I like the SCoC presidents analogy though, you don’t celebrate and congratulate yourself when you’ve tied your shoe laces at the start of a marathon, particularly if you’ve entered yourself in the race backed by money that was handed to you on a plate! That’s just political show boating and not a sign of an investment come good.

I have noted a former airline MD and current employee of a major airline has commented that this is a vanity project, that airlines will need assurances and losses underwriting and that it will only result in the displacement of passengers from other airports even if they’re successful. Their comment has been ‘liked’ by an aviation strategy consultant. You can add that to the only other aviation related comments that are to the negative. Only positive comments I’ve seen are from people involved in the project from an aviation perspective. Interesting.

Bitmingham does though have one overriding advantage - it will have its very own HS2 station in 2032 (unless there re more delays!). This will provide direct connectivity to central London in around 32 minutes https://www.independent.co.uk/trave...ngham-airport-london-train-rail-b2731541.html
Quite impressive and only 17 minutes more the the Heathrow express from Paddington

 

@Qing4theloo if you are interested I can provide an outline of why the U.K. airport network is as it is now. It might not be a topic for this thread but in short it was a factor of lots of redundant airfields post WW2, the identification of a few deemed nationally important based on the needs of the time, and the belief that local authorities knew their requirements better than people in Westminster and so it was their job, not the Governments, to handle their own air travel affairs as they saw fit. You might call it devolution in action!

 

There's only 25,000 in his group and half of them are Africans. Apart from the politicians, Dan Fell and Peter Kennan are both Labour.

 

You have answered in the very first paragraph why DSA will fail. One of, if not the actual largest revenue earner for airports is from car parking.

So you're saying that the most successful airports are the ones with the crappiest public transport access.

OK ....

 

So you're saying that the most successful airports are the ones with the crappiest public transport access.

OK ....

I don’t wish to speak on behalf of @Speedbird1 too much but it’s not as simple as that. The busier the airport the more viable purpose built alternative surface access becomes. Obviously the London airports can support rail links not only because of critical mass but because they handle a significant amount of inbound tourism heading into London. Manchester is handling millions of passengers per year, so even though the proportion of users arriving on public transport is the same as other airports, the sheer number of those people mean that rail links are viable.

All airports make a large amount of their revenue in car parking. Coppard has acknowledged this in his Q&A with the Yorkshire Post a couple of weeks ago and whilst he admits to wanting to see rail access (which I don’t believe will ever happen) he said that car parking contributes significantly to an airports bottom line and therefore they wouldn’t want to deter people from using the car parks.

 

Vinny is considerig challenging the subsidy https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/bus...-sheffield-airport-reopening-decision-5315273

 

Vinny is considerig challenging the subsidy https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/bus...-sheffield-airport-reopening-decision-5315273

Interesting, the statement is vague and I assume carefully written with legal advice. It’s basically Hodder saying that they don’t believe the SAU advice has been heeded and that therefore if it hasn’t they may be in a position to challenge. It could also suggest they aren’t too concerned over it which may suggest there are signals that airlines currently using LBA will stick to using LBA. Of course they won’t want to alienate the people of South Yorkshire either.

I haven’t seen anything in the publicly available documents which suggest they have taken the advice of the SAU findings, if anything they appear to have doubled down on certain aspects that the SAU were critical of!

 

So you're saying that the most successful airports are the ones with the crappiest public transport access.

OK ....

I’m not saying that at all. I’m saying airports rely on making money from car parking. You remove that revenue and it won’t survive. It’s simple. Manchester for example which has great transport links has 10% arrive by rail and 25% by taxi. 65% are using there own vehicles to get to the airport and most will be paying for parking.

If the residents of South Yorkshire want DSA so that they can ultimately avoid paying for parking on their once a year getaways then it’s completely unviable. They also best be prepared for big increases in what they were paying previously for parking and for things like drop off. All vital to counter the lack of income from airlines they would need to attract.

@pug has hit the right notes on the post above.