Future Infrastructure Developments

[imagineif]

An updated release of the LBA ICAO Airport Docking / Parking Chart Shows Stand positions 16 to 18 as having both L & R Designations (16R 16L etc) which would suggest preparation / expectation of more common visits by wide-body aircraft would it not..otherwise why change it as these stands are usually used for 737/757's of Jet2.

 

[LBA787]

I don't think widebodies will be parked down on stands 16,17 or 18. It's probably just making better use of the space available.

These stands Originally had interstand roads inbetween them and there max capacity was a 733 size. With more 738's and A320's based at the airport by next summer they have removed the roads and created 16L+16R & 18L+18R. Instead of just three 733's being parked up they can now put for example two 738's and a 733 in the same space. It's just forward thinking by the airport and its operations teams as flexibility when planning to park 19 or 20 night stoppers is priceless at a space constrained airfield.

Also note on the new ICAO parking chart u can see the new widened taxiway alpha.

 

[Seasider]

When looking on the multiflight webcam, at lunchtime, I noticed the covered walkway. Does anyone have a picture taken closer, from the Tower or Apron?

 

[User0001]

been through it a good few times now and I was spot on with bus shelter. Quite proud. I don't remember it being on the masterplan or on the magnificent presentation by Bridgepoint? It does keep your hair dry though a bit like a terminal extension would have.

 

[White Heather]

Pete, as you should know, LBA are currently working on the extension planning. They were unable to build the extension over the past 12 months as they had still not completed all the planning conditions, jumped through hoops and over hurdles as demanded by the council prior to building commencing. Now that they have, they are starting the planning process. Its not a question of 'if', its 'when'.

As I have pointed out before, what has just been done is phase 1 of 2, the 2nd phase being the extension. LBA cannot build something when the council had not formally signed off the planning consent until very recently. As at 8th September (the last Consultative Meeting) that sign off was imminent, but still not done by the Council as the Forecourt Management Plan had to be approved first, and it now has been.

We should be happy they did the internal work they could when they did despite the recession and downturn in aviation - they could have just sat back and waited for full approval first and then done everything all at once, in which case we would definitely not have had Monarch or a Thomson base next year as the terminal would be the same now as it was 2 years ago.

 

[wawkrk]

Maybe Heather can comment on my posting.

A new 10m pound extension to the terminal at Southend will begin in the next few days.
It all seemed to happen very quickly.
Is this because the local council fully support their airport whilst Leeds always seems to have obstacles and years of delay. Are these delays normal or just nitpicking?
(no doubt whoshotjimmi will have something to say)

 

[User0001]

In truth I'm afraid it isn't that. It is quite simply a that a company changed its mind about how much money it was going spend. Nothing to do with planning at all which all could have been sorted in a matter weeks / months if the desire was there. If you cut through all the company spin this is the answer. I have no axe to grind. I wouldn't say the council makes life easy though. A bit like at LUFC you simply have to be able to read between the lines or you'll be had hook, line and sinker.

 

[User0001]

They haven't changed their mind about how much money - they have changed their mind about when to spend the money. Even if the planning had been in place, I doubt they would have committed to the full extension now because the economic picture makes it difficult to plan with certainty. The internal refurb is effectively half the work anyway and means the extension can now be done as a simple bolt-on as and when the company has confidence the capacity will be required. To me, that's sensible management. Lots of people have suggested they should have built it all in one go, but it's never accompanied with any financial Insight to support the argument.

The planning issues are real though and as soon as the council started to propose conditions that directly challenged the airports pricing and revenue generating schemes, it was inevitable it would get messy. There's a wealth of documentation on the Public Access site which is worth a read. The email exchanges between the airport and the council on the issue of taxi ranks is a fascinating insight. Having read all 180+ documents, I had plenty of sympathy for the airport company afterwards

 

[User0001]

You sound like you represent the company and its business strategy and decisions whereas I am only interested in LBIA. The airport is massively behind where it should be which is completely irrespective of the recession. We were shown and promised a lot and SO FAR IT HASN'T BEEN DELIVERED. The terminal has been further squeezed to maximise what we have which is a short term money making strategy for the company but isn't what is ideally required for LBIA. We need an enlarged terminal building. Is the Yorkshire conurbation one seventh of the North West conurbation? Answer :No.

As for planning restrictions I think that is a very convenient excuse for the recession led slow down of Bridgepoint. Don't think we'll ever agree on this but one thing we can agree on is that we have got a new bus shelter like wheather tunnel so far and not a terminal extension.

 

[SNOWMAN]

ref terminal extension.
my own thoughts are i think we the users of lba have done well with what bridgepoint have done the terminal,we would all like to see a terminal extension asap,it might have helped if b/point had made some money out of lba? i am sure ls16 will know how much theyhave lost,did b/point have to put in place a water drainage scheme to keep the council happy +the taxi rank problems,+god knows what else to keep the council happy.when i think back to what it was like when i first used lba what a vast difference now,i am certain b/point will come good when the time is right.also our good friends white heather & ls16 will keep us up to date with all relevant & correct info on the subject as & when it becomes available.
sm1

 

[White Heather]

Thanks Snowman and yes I am sure we will keep you up to date with the facts, but sadly I doubt that whatever is said, LUFC Pete will refuse to accept them as he clearly has his mind made up - although what facts he bases his beliefs on escape me. Perhaps Pete should send his views to the airport MD and I am sure he will get a response that fully explains everything - but would he believe that either??

 

[User0001]

Over the last 20 30 40 years of basic failure of LBIA to correctly represent the size of its conurbation we've all become a little bit blind as to what the actual potential is at LBIA. This is why people readilly accept the basic minimum and don't think that they deserve more.

As I have said everybody in the 70s and 80s and even upto the present day would go into a travel agency and not even bat an eyelid when they were told matter of fact (ly) that they would have to fly from manchester. Only when people carefully assess the facts and figures will people realise that we actually deserve an airport with a proper terminal - and that is what we demand.

West Yorkshire is one of the biggest conurbations in Western Europe and the airport is still miles and miles behind where it could have been because of this prevalent defeatist, incorrect second class citizen attitude that has been profligated by successions of dodgy mismanagement.

 

[User0001]

Perhaps the airport MD will put an accurate Airport Masterplan on the website rather than the completely misleading one that has been left for years on the website with no corrective or additional information to state how inaccurate it is?

We are all on the same side so there will be no falling out. I can tell youre a LUFC fan whiteheather with your unquestioning loyalty.

 

[White Heather]

Absolutely right Pete, and I actually agree with much of what you say, especially in your previous post. I lost count of how many travel agents I visited in the early days of the Support Group and when trying to secure 24 hour operations, and ended up having conversations with their managers about their policy of directing passengers to Manchester instead of promoting growth at their airport. It was rare to get any arguments from them either as they usually felt the same way, but were following management directives. However, there was one I remember who managed a shop less than a mile from LBA who told me she didn't want holiday makers flying out of LBA as it was too noisy!!

Where you and me differ is simply that I don't think Bridgepoint have done at all badly with the terminal so far. They didn't promise a specific delivery date when they bought LBA, only what they would invest over a period of time, and they are doing that. It would have been easy to pull the plug on a major development during the recession and leave it while later, but they have, at least invested sufficient in the terminal to entice our new operators and have been successful in doing so against a backdrop of recession - and I note your message of congratulations on the General Thread, so you cleary recognise their efforts.

Our other difference is that you seem to believe I am duped into believing what I and the rest of the consultative committee are told, but sitting on that committee are councillors involved in the planning process, so I hear the 'story' from both sides, and as the final Section 106 planning consents have only just been complied with, the terminal could not have been built yet. However, planning is starting, and had Bridgepoint not been committed fully to LBA they could (again) have pulled the plug in the face of the constant interference from the council with regard to their parking and drop off policy - which is in fact a Commercial decision by the airport so not strictly speaking anything to do with the council other than the impact on the local roads resulting from people doing their best to avoid paying. Both parties have worked together though to resolve their differences and LBA is now in a postion to move forward.

Of course, once the terminal expansion is completed and we have the facilities to handle even more passengers, there will be a real need to address the limited aircraft parking stands, and parallel taxiway - and of course the thorny issue of road infrastructure will be thrown into the equation again in an attempt to get Bridgepoint to spend money on roads they don't own, which to me is like commercial blackmail.

No doubt at all that we are both on the same side and wanting LBA development - its just that I think that in the relatively short time Bridgepoint have owned LBA they have done remarkably well despite the hurdles constantly put in front of them. Some view the instigation of the kiss and fly charges as a retrograde step, but my view is I am very happy to pay it in return for the arrival of Ryanair, Easyjet, Monarch, British Airways, PIA and Thomson, plus largescale expansion from Jet2 to over 40 routes, plus a terminal refurb, expansion to come, new car parks, resurfaced runway and new airfield drainage. Not bad in what, 5 years? Consider also that all of that is in addition to the ongoing running costs of £29m per year just to run the airport.

In the circumstances, such as the walkway being a glorified bus shelter is fine by me as it does the job its intended to do and is certainly better than nothing as I am sure wawkrk and others who have been soaked whilst trekking back to the terminal on a wet day will testify.

Definitely no fall out though - as Eddie Gray says about football - 'It's all about opinions' - and that applies to LBA, which is why this forum is so succesful.

 

[Seasider]

I only asked for a picture of the new walkway! :whiteflag:

 

[Aviador]

[warning]Some posts have been moved.

Until such time as planning commences on projects to build a new road or rail link to the airport the discussion about road or rail access to the airport needs to be continued in the Road, Rail & Access Thread[/warning]

 

[EX9]

I posted this earlier in the thread, however i will put it up again.

It's very much out of date now as it leads all the way to stand 14 and the enterance to the arrivals and out of gates 3/4 where the bus is parked is nearing completion.

 

[Tarn Spotter]

Assume new walkway apron side does not go all the way to the floor. When we walked down it, it was full of rubbish. Girls who mann also need some training, was raining when we used, therefore came into its own. However, girl tried to push us out onto the plane when both steps were full of people. Appreciate need to load plane quickly, however, no point in providing a walkway if we are going to be pushed out into the rain and your access to the plane is restricted.

 

[Seasider]

Patience is rewarded.

 

[LBA787]

I have been watching the construction of the walkway for a few months now. Tarn Spotter has correctly pointed out the side walls for some reason don't go all the way to the floor. If this is the finished product then I really don't think the airport have thought it through.

When it snows in the winter months the plough clearing the main airside road will force ice and snow under the gap and into the walkway.... One would hope some sort of side skirt can be added when they make the finishing touches. This would make the whole structure weather proof and far more appealing to the pax.