Future Infrastructure Developments

[Scottie Dog]

It's very easy for one answer to a question to lead to a lengthy discussion of another matter.

Technically at least one page of these posts should really be in the Current Affairs forum under "How concerned are you with Coronavirus?".

Can I please ask you to, where ever possible, restrict discussion to the thread subject. I know it's hard to always do this, however I'm sure it would be appreciated by many - there are so many different forums on here with their own threads that sometimes it can be hard to know where to post a reply and so, if necessary the moderators may find it necessary to move posts.

Thank you for your understanding.

 

[Heathrowflyer]

It's related because the whole modelling for the latest planning submission is based on recovery post covid and projections around this. The report says recovery could be in 2 years.

 

[Heathrowflyer]

If it's not related them we might as well.disregard the lengthy consultant's report and extended planning consultation period. Remember it's the airport who decided to include this report in terms of the planning process. So the debate is relevant because the airport's projections of pax numbers (for the new terminal) are essentially based on a covid vaccine being in place or such effective track and tracing that airlines will be able to start international services again without fear of quarantines or economic constraints.

 

[White Heather]

The airport included this because they were asked for their response to the negative claims made by GALBA, by Leeds City Planning.
Personally, I am doing my best not to read all the press about Covid and vaccine, because I have no idea who to believe. 'Experts' disagree so how can we lesser mortals hope to know what is true and what is fiction? We cling to hope but there are those who seem to prefer to pedal their gloom and doom at every opportunity. If I end up reading the same debate about Covid and infection rates and vaccines on this thread as I am trying to avoid reading elsewhere, I will leave you to it & maybe be back later when the discussion is about the airport.

 

[LBA4EVER]

They seems to be so many things happening at the moment of which many connect with this bloody virus resulting in debates mixing together, but yes they must be a structure on here or things will all get jumbled up!

 

[Heathrowflyer]

Ok completely understand ... but just to clarify and to put this to bed, I am unable to support this planning document given that it makes such claims. I have strongly supported the planning process so far ( and got nearly 20 others to write supporting it too) but I can not put my name to support this 2 year claim when there is no independent research to back this up.

 

[White Heather]

Ok completely understand ... but just to clarify and to put this to bed, I am unable to support this planning document given that it makes such claims. I have strongly supported the planning process so far ( and got nearly 20 others to write supporting it too) but I can not put my name to support this 2 year claim when there is no independent research to back this up.

The report is written by an independent aviation consultant. How independent do you want? We have never been in this situation before so there is no solid data on which to base any research. All the report claims is that in the past LBA has recovered quickly so they are estimating 2 year recovery time. That might be right or it might be wrong, but it's AMP Capital taking the risk. Are you saying you now oppose the terminal development because nobody can be certain about the recovery time for aviation and LBA?

You don't need to support this document - it is mainly a document provided to counter claims that aviation is now finished so the terminal is not necessary. Anyone who writes to Leeds Planning to complain about this report might just as well join GALBA and have done with it.

It is 3 years before the terminal will be completed and 2024 before it will see a full year in service - plenty of time for the industry to recover. Furthermore, the terminal is required even without the expected rate of passenger growth as the present building is an embarrassment. I would have thought anyone who supports LBA would be happy to see that this independent report suggests that growth is still likely and confirms also that AMP still want to build the terminal on schedule.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

The airport want to make a 150M pound investment that will have a positive impact on the local economy and provide much needed employment in the construction phase alone. If aviation recovers there will be yet more jobs in the new terminal.

Why would anyone object to the proposals on the basis that aviation may never recover? The risk is the airports. Lets encourage the investment and get the construction money into the local economy. The airport owners can worry about the recovery.

'Build it and the people will come'

 

[LBA4EVER]

Brits love to holiday! need I say more, believe you me whether this virus buggers off this year or next the brits will be back in force filling up jet2 and Ryanair aircraft! With a new terminal we should see current regional carriers possibly upgrade too (eg, aer lingus to A320, KLM to 737 ) and i can imagine new operators such as eurowings, wideroe come on board. Long haul does not really affect us too much at LBA. to sum up the planes will be back and we need a new terminal!

 

[Heathrowflyer]

I'm not objecting to the development and I want it as much as anyone. I'm saying this among friends, here, on this forum. What I'm objecting to is figures that dont add up in terms of what other airlines/airports are reporting and indeed aviation investment experts ( just read the FT or Wall Street Journal if you are in any doubt about this). Our case is strong enough without presenting figures that analysts would question. If we decide to quote such figures then it dents our credibility. And when friends around me have just lost their jobs at Jet 2 ( a strong company), a two year full recovery in the aviation sector is an astonishing claim.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

We can't know how long recovery will take however LCC can ensure the airport is best placed when it does.


Best

 

[White Heather]

I'm not objecting to the development and I want it as much as anyone. I'm saying this among friends, here, on this forum. What I'm objecting to is figures that dont add up in terms of what other airlines/airports are reporting and indeed aviation investment experts ( just read the FT or Wall Street Journal if you are in any doubt about this). Our case is strong enough without presenting figures that analysts would question. If we decide to quote such figures then it dents our credibility. And when friends around me have just lost their jobs at Jet 2 ( a strong company), a two year full recovery in the aviation sector is an astonishing claim.

They are not claiming there will be a full recovery in 2 years. What they are saying is that LBA can still grow to 7m passengers per year by 2032 instead of 2030. A full return of passengers could take more than two years but they still feel that (taking into account all factors) that any such situation can be recovered by 2032 with 7m pax. That might require slightly faster growth in the later part of the 2020s than previously thought. We don't know what discussions LBA have had with airlines for future operations here.
I don't see how anyone can argue against the report as there is absolutely no previous experience of a global pandemic since aviation became a widespread mode of transport. Nobody knows what will happen. Some say it will bounce back quickly. Some say not. Some hope not for their own motives. There is no right answer to this.

 

[Heathrowflyer]

I work in aviation so we hear a little and read a lot. It's our jobs not an informed interest.

 

[White Heather]

An interesting article yesterday in which Cllr Jackie Whiteley (Bradford), was moaning in the papers about the fact that her request that Bradford Council put pressure on Leeds Council to treat the airport terminal application and the change to day time flying hours element of the application as two separate planning matters had been ignored by Bradford Council, who she states have raised no concerns or objections in their official response to Leeds City Council. That is good news indeed. Clearly Bradford Council want this terminal development and are not too bothered about the amendment to the day time flying hours either.
Cllr Whiteley it would appear, accepts that the terminal is a necessity but she doesn't want the amended daytime hours as she claims it is the Bradford ratepayers in Burley in Wharfedale, Menston, and Baildon who suffer all the extra noise that (she claims) this will generate.
If Bradford have ignored her, then it appears they have also ignored Cllr Pennington with his idiotic claims that the airport should not be allowed to become a 24 hour airport.

 

[LBA4EVER]

An interesting article yesterday in which Cllr Jackie Whiteley (Bradford), was moaning in the papers about the fact that her request that Bradford Council put pressure on Leeds Council to treat the airport terminal application and the change to day time flying hours element of the application as two separate planning matters had been ignored by Bradford Council, who she states have raised no concerns or objections in their official response to Leeds City Council. That is good news indeed. Clearly Bradford Council want this terminal development and are not too bothered about the amendment to the day time flying hours either.
Cllr Whiteley it would appear, accepts that the terminal is a necessity but she doesn't want the amended daytime hours as she claims it is the Bradford ratepayers in Burley in Wharfedale, Menston, and Baildon who suffer all the extra noise that (she claims) this will generate.
If Bradford have ignored her, then it appears they have also ignored Cllr Pennington with his idiotic claims that the airport should not be allowed to become a 24 hour airport.

I live on baildon moor near to bingley, by the time the aircraft get to us here there at a good height mainly due to them taking off, noise is not a problem what so ever! Bradford would benefit from a new terminal for the Asian community that would require a link from LBA to Pakistan and even india, B787 and the like would be ideal.

 

[White Heather]

Anyone just see Look North and their report on Wizz opening a base at DSA? It was entirely positive and described by Harry Gration as welcome good news. Quite properly.
However, every single report I have seen the BBC do relating to any sort of expansion at LBA, including those relating to the terminal development, has had negative undertones at best and downright negative at worst.
There was no mention at all if the Environment, or noise, or Carbon emissions today yet anything about LBA is always met with a luke warm response by the Beeb.
I would love to quiz the editor of this program to find out why their is such negativity towards development at LBA yet something similar at DSA is met with complete enthusiasm.

 

[craigston_tom]

Anyone just see Look North and their report on Wizz opening a base at DSA? It was entirely positive and described by Harry Gration as welcome good news. Quite properly.
However, every single report I have seen the BBC do relating to any sort of expansion at LBA, including those relating to the terminal development, has had negative undertones at best and downright negative at worst.
There was no mention at all if the Environment, or noise, or Carbon emissions today yet anything about LBA is always met with a luke warm response by the Beeb.
I would love to quiz the editor of this program to find out why their is such negativity towards development at LBA yet something similar at DSA is met with complete enthusiasm.

Yes I saw this evenings Look North.
Like you say, Harry described it as Welcome Good News, which indeed it is.

All focusing on the positive aspects from this story with the creation of 36 local jobs, 300 supply chain jobs and the opportunity to drive economic recovery.
Totally agree with you on how it’s always positive for Doncaster, but rarely anything more than a lukewarm reaction, at best, to anything LBA based.

To be honest, the whole focus of Look North, always seems to sway towards what’s happening in South Yorkshire.

 

[lbaspotter]

Yeah it always seems same with BBC Look North, especially seen as both main host's Harry & Amy are South Yorkshire based.

 

[stars&sids]

Oh, you mean that famous Sheffield Wednesday fan Gration! Yes it always baffles me that my own local airport DSA receives better reporting from Look North than LBA does, when they should really give equal support to both. I’ve given up trying to fathom out the BBC a long time ago, they always push their own agenda rather than being neutral and unbiased.

 

[White Heather]

Yeah it always seems same with BBC Look North, especially seen as both main host's Harry & Amy are South Yorkshire based.

I didn't know that. I always thought Harry Gration was a Bradford lad living in York. Does he really support the Wendies??