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...?

 

I decided to do a Chadwick and feed it into a well known AI system. It gave me the following;

This update from Ros Jones is a fascinating exercise in "procedural optimism." It manages to list several bullet points that sound like momentum, but when you look at the actual mechanics of aviation regulation in 2026, it reveals just how far the airport is from seeing a commercial tailfin.

Here is a breakdown of what is actually being said between the lines:

1. The "Airspace" Paradox​

The Mayor mentions "regular meetings" regarding the Airspace Change Process (ACP). This is a massive red flag.

• The Reality: The airport's former controlled airspace was formally withdrawn from the UK Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP) in late 2025. It has reverted to Class G (uncontrolled) airspace.
• The Hurdles: To get commercial jets back, they must complete the CAP1616 process from scratch. As of early 2026, this project is only at Stage 1 (Define). Given that Stage 3 (Consultation) alone usually takes months and the CAA decision (Stage 5) can take a year, "regular meetings" in 2026 suggest that the 2027 opening for passengers is on life support. You cannot fly a Boeing 737 into uncontrolled airspace on a scheduled basis.

2. The "Terminal Refurbishment" Smoke Screen​

The update says a "design brief" is being prepared.

• The Critique: In the world of construction and infrastructure, a "design brief" is the very first step. It means no contractors have been hired, no planning permissions for internal modifications have been granted, and no physical work has started.
• The Opportunity Cost: This terminal has been dormant since 2022. Re-commissioning security scanners, border control e-gates, and baggage handling systems to meet 2026/27 standards is a multi-million-pound task. Celebrating a "design brief" in 2026 is like a chef celebrating that they’ve started writing a grocery list for a dinner party that was supposed to start an hour ago.

3. The "Airport City" Pivot​

Notice the shift in language toward the "South Yorkshire Airport City" programme.

• The Critique: This is a classic "Plan B" move. If you can’t get the airlines to return, you pivot to real estate. By focusing on "opportunities for local businesses" and "Airport City," the council is hedging. They are preparing to justify the £138m–£160m of public investment by building warehouses and offices (Gateway East) even if the runway remains largely quiet. You don't need a functioning airport to have a "business park," but "Airport City" sounds much more ambitious to the voters.

4. Soft Metrics vs. Hard Assets​

Nearly half the update is dedicated to "soft" promotional activity:

• Developing the "Brand"
• Improving "Public Awareness"
• Creating a "Digital Presence" (Website)
• "Stakeholder Engagement"
• The Reality: Airlines like TUI or Ryanair do not decide where to base a £100m aircraft based on a council-run website or "public awareness." They decide based on landing fees, fuel costs, and proven load factors. Every penny spent on "developing the brand" is money not being used to lower the astronomical risk for a carrier to return to a failed site.

5. Recruitment and Committees​

The appointment of a Chair for the Airport Consultative Committee (ACC) and "recruitment of key personnel" are administrative requirements, not operational milestones.

• The Critique: An ACC is a statutory body for noise and community complaints. It’s a box-ticking exercise. If the "key personnel" being hired are administrators and PR leads rather than Air Traffic Controllers (ATCOs) or specialized airport fire crews (who are currently in short supply nationally), the airport isn't actually getting closer to being "licensed."

It did get a couple of things wrong. Technically there’s nothing stopping airlines from flying scheduled 737s in uncontrolled airspace. That would be up to any airlines internal risk assessment and wouldn’t form part of their commercial decision making.

The bit about ATCOs, we know that recruitment is ongoing but why didn’t she mention this specifically? It’s important.

The reason I use AI is to highlight its limitations as much as anything else. However, it does pick out subtle wording that may otherwise be missed. I certainly didn’t pick up on the ‘design brief’ being worked on for the terminal for instance. Does this mean they haven’t even ordered the equipment yet? Are they stalling whilst the commercial negotiations are ongoing? Why is there no mention of commercial negotiations? They’re the important bit. They can engage with ‘stakeholders’ all they want, but if that doesn’t include airlines and freight companies then it’s all academic isn’t it.

Suspect the reason for this underwhelming update from Jones is because she was significantly burnt politically last year by putting out highly optimistic updates with some specific milestones all of which came back to bite her at the end of 2025…..

 

I honestly do not understand this narrative that YP and LBA are in cahoots, its really strange, YP post negative stories on LBA all the time, you cant argue with stupid though, they of course are correct..

It seems his latest 3/4 posts haven't received the traction / comment or likes he likes to try and achieve, maybe people losing interest? maybe people are cottoned on to the dictator or a desperate mechanic..

Ironic since there is sooo much support for the airport but yet these posts get 50+ likes, pictures of my dog gets more.

Just a group of conspiracy theorists unfortunately. They are the sort of people that if you told them the sky was blue, they’d argue it was green and it was LBA’s fault.

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head about support diminishing. People are clearly bored of it all now and probably just skip past the mechanics posts in their social media feeds.

 

Suspect the reason for this underwhelming update from Jones is because she was significantly burnt politically last year by putting out highly optimistic updates with some specific milestones all of which came back to bite her at the end of 2025…..

It should be serving as a reality check for all those in determined favour. If you were to ask what was actually achieved in 2025, what would the answer be? ‘The operator’ was announced in November 2024, the lease early Spring 2024. Last year it was two votes with foregone conclusions, that’s it. Nothing has moved forward except talking themselves into investing what they were always going to invest anyway. Has the subsidy been published yet? It’s really quite important for them to get on with that because they can’t spend the money otherwise. What are the DfT going to do about airspace? I’d suggest not that much, so why keep talking to them about it?

 

I decided to do a Chadwick and feed it into a well known AI system. It gave me the following;

This update from Ros Jones is a fascinating exercise in "procedural optimism." It manages to list several bullet points that sound like momentum, but when you look at the actual mechanics of aviation regulation in 2026, it reveals just how far the airport is from seeing a commercial tailfin.

Here is a breakdown of what is actually being said between the lines:

1. The "Airspace" Paradox​

The Mayor mentions "regular meetings" regarding the Airspace Change Process (ACP). This is a massive red flag.

• The Reality: The airport's former controlled airspace was formally withdrawn from the UK Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP) in late 2025. It has reverted to Class G (uncontrolled) airspace.
• The Hurdles: To get commercial jets back, they must complete the CAP1616 process from scratch. As of early 2026, this project is only at Stage 1 (Define). Given that Stage 3 (Consultation) alone usually takes months and the CAA decision (Stage 5) can take a year, "regular meetings" in 2026 suggest that the 2027 opening for passengers is on life support. You cannot fly a Boeing 737 into uncontrolled airspace on a scheduled basis.

2. The "Terminal Refurbishment" Smoke Screen​

The update says a "design brief" is being prepared.

• The Critique: In the world of construction and infrastructure, a "design brief" is the very first step. It means no contractors have been hired, no planning permissions for internal modifications have been granted, and no physical work has started.
• The Opportunity Cost: This terminal has been dormant since 2022. Re-commissioning security scanners, border control e-gates, and baggage handling systems to meet 2026/27 standards is a multi-million-pound task. Celebrating a "design brief" in 2026 is like a chef celebrating that they’ve started writing a grocery list for a dinner party that was supposed to start an hour ago.

3. The "Airport City" Pivot​

Notice the shift in language toward the "South Yorkshire Airport City" programme.

• The Critique: This is a classic "Plan B" move. If you can’t get the airlines to return, you pivot to real estate. By focusing on "opportunities for local businesses" and "Airport City," the council is hedging. They are preparing to justify the £138m–£160m of public investment by building warehouses and offices (Gateway East) even if the runway remains largely quiet. You don't need a functioning airport to have a "business park," but "Airport City" sounds much more ambitious to the voters.

4. Soft Metrics vs. Hard Assets​

Nearly half the update is dedicated to "soft" promotional activity:

• Developing the "Brand"
• Improving "Public Awareness"
• Creating a "Digital Presence" (Website)
• "Stakeholder Engagement"
• The Reality: Airlines like TUI or Ryanair do not decide where to base a £100m aircraft based on a council-run website or "public awareness." They decide based on landing fees, fuel costs, and proven load factors. Every penny spent on "developing the brand" is money not being used to lower the astronomical risk for a carrier to return to a failed site.

5. Recruitment and Committees​

The appointment of a Chair for the Airport Consultative Committee (ACC) and "recruitment of key personnel" are administrative requirements, not operational milestones.

• The Critique: An ACC is a statutory body for noise and community complaints. It’s a box-ticking exercise. If the "key personnel" being hired are administrators and PR leads rather than Air Traffic Controllers (ATCOs) or specialized airport fire crews (who are currently in short supply nationally), the airport isn't actually getting closer to being "licensed."

It did get a couple of things wrong. Technically there’s nothing stopping airlines from flying scheduled 737s in uncontrolled airspace. That would be up to any airlines internal risk assessment and wouldn’t form part of their commercial decision making.

The bit about ATCOs, we know that recruitment is ongoing but why didn’t she mention this specifically? It’s important.

The reason I use AI is to highlight its limitations as much as anything else. However, it does pick out subtle wording that may otherwise be missed. I certainly didn’t pick up on the ‘design brief’ being worked on for the terminal for instance. Does this mean they haven’t even ordered the equipment yet? Are they stalling whilst the commercial negotiations are ongoing? Why is there no mention of commercial negotiations? They’re the important bit. They can engage with ‘stakeholders’ all they want, but if that doesn’t include airlines and freight companies then it’s all academic isn’t it.

Yes, the design brief is the very first stage. Basically a wish list of what they want. Architects then take that away and come up with designs which are presented with estimated costs, considered, and eventually after much discussion, approved or revised. Either way the designs then need firming up along with costs, presenting again, reconsidered, and eventually signed off. Only then will the contract go out to tender, a contractor be selected, and then they will start ordering . Even in a relatively small project this can take months. On a terminal project, they're miles away.

 

I notice the mechanic has meddled in a YP article issued today regarding a CAA forecast of 5% increase in holiday bookings over the same period last year. The bloke is directly quoted:

Save DSA’s Mark Chadwick said the figures were “great news for UK aviation and tourism”.

“Any passenger growth adds real momentum behind the business case that has been put forward for Doncaster Sheffield Airport,” he told The Yorkshire Post.
“There’s a strong and vibrant growing catchment area to connect our region to the world.
“With other airports close to capacity, then this can only be a good thing for DSA.

“If the package holiday demand rises, then tour operators often find there are limited attractive slots at other airports.”

Boost for Doncaster airport reopening plans with increase in package holiday bookings

Plans to reopen Doncaster Sheffield Airport (DSA) have been handed a boost as figures revealed that package holiday bookings are expected to increase by 5 per cent this year.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

 

So for round figures sake LBA and EMA carry 4mppa. 5% of that is 200k which they can easily absorb. it's just ongoing delusional rubbish to suit the narrative

 

So for round figures sake LBA and EMA carry 4mppa. 5% of that is 200k which they can easily absorb. it's just ongoing delusional rubbish to suit the narrative

It’s odd isn’t it how a bloke who runs a car garage is becoming ever more the spokesperson for this. Not the Ops Director or MAI or indeed anyone directly involved in it, no a car mechanic and a couple of MPs. Even Ros Jones neglected to mention anything about passenger flights in her latest (non)update.

Not only does it undermine professionalism but it also sends out a very uncertain signal to airlines. If there’s anything airlines do not like it’s uncertainty!

 

I wouldn’t even put it past the mechanic to be trying to email airlines/CEO’s himself to try drum up business (some what..?). If you ask me he is playing a risky game and no doubt stepping on the toes of everyone involved and no doubt p*sing them off.

I think the industry is watching and rolling their eyes at what’s going on.

The more this goes on I think the supporters on the page and everyone observing are taking him with a pinch of salt, the desperation of it all

 

I wouldn’t even put it past the mechanic to be trying to email airlines/CEO’s himself to try drum up business (some what..?). If you ask me he is playing a risky game and no doubt stepping on the toes of everyone involved and no doubt p*sing them off.

I think the industry is watching and rolling their eyes at what’s going on.

The more this goes on I think the supporters on the page and everyone observing are taking him with a pinch of salt, the desperation of it all

I think that will be the next step, can almost guarantee it that there’ll be petitions led by him with signatures sent to a load of airlines and his efforts shared on the group (and probably in the YP/DFP too), think it’s only a matter of time actually. Suppose he’ll wait til he gets told about the airspace etc.

 

I wouldn’t even put it past the mechanic to be trying to email airlines/CEO’s himself to try drum up business (some what..?). If you ask me he is playing a risky game and no doubt stepping on the toes of everyone involved and no doubt p*sing them off.

I think the industry is watching and rolling their eyes at what’s going on.

The more this goes on I think the supporters on the page and everyone observing are taking him with a pinch of salt, the desperation of it all

He’s playing a very risky game of undermining any potential conversations with this pure desperation and distortion of facts.

I can assure you that the industry will be watching but from a view of cringing at every statement he puts out and a level of annoyance at the fact he seems to think he knows better than industry experts. Look at the way he bad mouthed certain people at York Aviation and other consultants on his group. He basically invited a pile on of these people for daring to speak the truth about the future of the airport. Unfortunately for him, these things get noticed throughout the industry and do DSA absolutely no favours.

I assume the YP only gave him the time after he pestered them with letters about “misleading” headlines that weren’t actually misleading.

 

I think that will be the next step, can almost guarantee it that there’ll be petitions led by him with signatures sent to a load of airlines and his efforts shared on the group (and probably in the YP/DFP too), think it’s only a matter of time actually. Suppose he’ll wait til he gets told about the

He’s playing a very risky game of undermining any potential conversations with this pure desperation and distortion of facts.

I can assure you that the industry will be watching but from a view of cringing at every statement he puts out and a level of annoyance at the fact he seems to think he knows better than industry experts. Look at the way he bad mouthed certain people at York Aviation and other consultants on his group. He basically invited a pile on of these people for daring to speak the truth about the future of the airport. Unfortunately for him, these things get noticed throughout the industry and do DSA absolutely no favours.

I assume the YP only gave him the time after he pestered them with letters about “misleading” headlines that weren’t actually misleading.

I wonder how the likes of O’Leary and Heapy would react to being spammed and hounded by a garage mechanic I suspect we all know…..
I expect whatever he does will be under the guidance of CDC unless he is stupid and pig headed enough to do it off his own back and risk derailing any commercial negotiations…..

 

Well it’s interesting that an innocuous photo posted to Chadwick’s page has attracted quite a number of cynical posts. Rare for that page but I suspect displaying that the tide may be turning even on there!

 

@pug @White Heather both Doncaster Free Press abd Yorkshire Post have run the Mechanic's AI written analysis on why public airports rather than pension fund airports are better https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.u...-funds-follows-long-established-model-5463866

 

@pug @White Heather both Doncaster Free Press abd Yorkshire Post have run the Mechanic's AI written analysis on why public airports rather than pension fund airports are better https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.u...-funds-follows-long-established-model-5463866

The car mechanic, no sorry the fam hungry, no sorry, the aviation expert Chadwick, my Christ, anyone take him seriously needs to evaluate themselves! Total clown amongst the whole circus, is anyone else just bored?

 

This whole argument is completely disingenuous. No-one’s been saying that airports can’t be publicly owned, just that they can’t use public money to distort the market through subsidies.

 

This whole argument is completely disingenuous. No-one’s been saying that airports can’t be publicly owned, just that they can’t use public money to distort the market through subsidies.

A public owned airport that’s expected to never make a profit? What’s the point?

I’ve been into Doncaster “city” centre and it’s a dive, very deprived, there is so much more that money can benefit than a struggling airport. Peel was always right

 

This whole argument is completely disingenuous. No-one’s been saying that airports can’t be publicly owned, just that they can’t use public money to distort the market through subsidies.

I’m wondering why he’s still trying to force the narrative. I was under the impression the funds are signed off, the loan is to be granted and work is continuing ‘apace’. So why does Chadwick still feel the need to send AI generated ‘opinions’ to the press?

You are correct though, but I think it’s the one argument Chadwick doesn’t understand, either that or he’s trying to deceive his followers to continue shoring up support.

 

I’m wondering why he’s still trying to force the narrative. I was under the impression the funds are signed off, the loan is to be granted and work is continuing ‘apace’. So why does Chadwick still feel the need to send AI generated ‘opinions’ to the press?

Because the subsidy announcement is the next inflection point, and it’s apparent in the nervous language from CDC and SYCMA about it that the prospect of a successful challenge represents a significant risk to the whole project.

 

I’m not a fan of Nick Fletcher at all, but his latest post starts to demonstrate costs, even at this early stage. And like ZB757 alluded, Doncaster city centre really could do with this money to rejuvenate it / change its use / make it be an attractive place for companies to invest in.

“
DSA – A New Year reality check

We all want Doncaster Sheffield Airport back. That hasn’t changed.
But it’s worth having a recap, a reminder of how we got here.

Firstly, our Mayors did not support the airport when it was open, and when it inevitably closed:

• The council said it couldn’t help before the petition, it later became clear that it could.
• The South Yorkshire Mayor said he didn’t have the funds, funding was subsequently found.
• There was repeated dither and delay at critical moments.
• I argued that a Compulsory Purchase Order should be pursued, it was not.
• A credible private investor willing to put up to £100m on the table was rejected.
• As a result, if this now fails, the public is left with a lease with Peel and no underlying assets.

Fast forward to today. Millions of pounds of public money are now being spent, yet when you read the Mayors’ latest posts, very little has actually changed.

What we do know:

Spend to November 2025
• Payroll: £2.3m+
• Buildings & repairs: £1.5m+
• Legal & judicial: £3.4m+
• Rent / lease: £1.3m
• Other costs: millions more

This does not include council staff time either. And all of it is paid for by us, the taxpayers, people going back to work this week and paying for the Mayors’ dither and delay.

What we still don’t have as the year begins:

A reopening date
Airlines signed
Routes confirmed
Passenger targets
A clear commercial plan
Airspace approval from the CAA

It’s also worth noting that Reform, who were meant to be saving Doncaster Council money, are now supporting our Labour Mayor and signing off a further £57m of debt.

So what should change?

A practical way forward

• Reducing reliance on public money by re-engaging private investors
• Prioritising airspace approval and airline agreements
• Bringing in experienced aviation leadership
• Publishing clear milestones and timelines
• Ensuring the public has full transparency on cost, risk and outcomes

This is what should happen if our airport has any chance of success. Will it? We shall see. One thing is certain: you can throw as much money at projects as you like, but without the right leadership, they will always fail.

I’ll keep you posted.”

 

Because the subsidy announcement is the next inflection point, and it’s apparent in the nervous language from CDC and SYCMA about it that the prospect of a successful challenge represents a significant risk to the whole project.

Might explain Ros Jones letter published in Yorkshire Post today too, talking of having 40 applicants for the ATC roles, appointing other specialists and also ‘positive discussions with passenger and freight operators’ which in other words means they have no commitments from anyone yet. All the while the wage bill increases significantly, Peel still charge for utilities, and the lease goes up to £3.3million per year in a couple of years. They’ll be lucky if the overheads are £10million per year at launch.