Future Infrastructure Developments

[User0001]

Considering Stephen McNamara works for the Irish rugby union, I doubt he's having any commercial discussions with airports these days. I suppose if it really is a "scrum" to get through arrivals at busy times, he might be able to offer some practical advice.
Seriously though, the idea that airlines have colluded at a senior level is probably nonsense and even if it is true, the idea the airport wouldn't be aware is fanciful. And where is the discussion on landing fees and a proper debate on whether the airlines are paying enough to be in a position to demand investment in things they aren't prepared to pay for ?

 

[airforced]

Seriously though, the idea that airlines have colluded at a senior level is probably nonsense and even if it is true, the idea the airport wouldn't be aware is fanciful. And where is the discussion on landing fees and a proper debate on whether the airlines are paying enough to be in a position to demand investment in things they aren't prepared to pay for ?

Sorry to have to point this out LS16 but you are going off topic.

Landing fees and whether or not the airlines are paying enough for whatever they get or don't get has nothing to do with the arrivals experience.

You are introducing a very red herring by bringing that up. Business matters between the airport authority and the airlines is exactly that and nothing at all to do with passengers comfort and safety.

 

[User0001]

And where is the discussion on landing fees and a proper debate on whether the airlines are paying enough to be in a position to demand investment in things they aren't prepared to pay for ?

Well, if it is the case that the airlines are not paying enough to facilitate the investment, that is not their fault.

Yes, they drive a hard bargain, but, its the responsibility of LBA or any airport to make sure that incomings are greater than that outgoings. In fact, that goes for any business trying to make a profit.

If, and its all subjective, LBA has lowered its fees to an unsustainable level to boost the passenger numbers, then, they have to live with that.

Im afraid LS16, you cannot force the blame on the airlines. It takes 2 to agree to a contract and if LBA lowered their fees too much, tough luck.

 

[lbia]

The three airlines do not need to be mentioned. One of the airlines will not have a presence anymore at LBA in the very near future.

The Airport have regular meetings with the Airlines, usually together in a group presentation and meeting/discussion.

There are various measures that the Airport are trying to bring in, which cost them more money due to the Airport's lacking resources and infrastructure. For example, the Airport have asked Airlines to pay for more of their own staff to ensure that the walkway is used safely. They also want Airlines to pay for extra staff to stand at the back of each Aircraft to make sure passengers do not walk onto the runway.

The Airline's issue with these points are that

A - why build a walkway that frankly is not safe, why should the Airlines pay for the Airports penny pinching. The walkway is managed by the Airport so why the hell should it be paid for by anyone other than the Airport. Thats like Ryanair expecting LBA to pay for its pilots. Its a complete joke.
B - the Airport only have 2 members of staff at a time working in ASU (previously Airfield Operations) which is a rediciously low number of staff. It is the job of the Airport operator to ensure the Airfield is safe, again why should the Airlines pay for extra members of staff to cover up for the Airports inadequencies. The ASU should be ensuring a safe operating environment airside, not the airlines.

I'm sure you can imagine how these talks ended - the lady from one low cost airline pretty much told them to f-off in true Michael O'L style. This is a huge can of worms and the Airport's management have really annoyed their customers by trying to impose these extra costs, and yes the Airlines DO talk about this together and make their views clear. There is no CAA reccomendation for the airlines to fund more staff in the walkway and at the rear of the Aircraft, and there are legal proceedings about the Airport bringing in these measures.

The Airport signed service agreements with all Airlines, careful not to confuse this with payment of charges as service agreements are totally different. The Airport are not meeting these agreements and are expecting the airlines to pay for these short falls. The argument that the Airlines have, is that if the Airport cannot even sort out the most basic things - escalators/buses/lifts that actually work etc etc then there is not a chance the Airlines should foot the bill for LBA's safety shortcomings. Quite rightly so.

Like I have said, the LBA management are great at bringing in new business, but they HAVE to accomodate this in development of the existing facilities. Say you had a shopping centre, the management signed a lovely lucrative contract with a high street retailer, when this retailer comes to open their store, they find there isn't actually space for their shop. The shopping centre then expect this retailer to pay for an extension. That is not what the retailer signed up for. The Airport are the operator of that Airfield and they are more than happy to sign agreements and bring in new business, but when it comes to it, they actuslly cannot cope and expect the new business to pay for this. They should have never written up the agreement if they cannot stick to their promises.

 

[User0001]

I agree that if the airport and the airline enter into a contract to provide a service at £x price, then of course there is an obligation to provide this service. However, if the airlines want the airport to undertake major investments to make it a bigger and better airport then the airlines should reasonably expect to pay more.

 

[lbia]

Why should they?! It's the Airport that is carrying out this expansion so they are the ones that should pay for it.

If a supermarket was selling loaves of bread for £1.50 but they wanted to expand the store they would not expect customers to pay for this! They would not suddenly start charging £3 for the exact same loaf of bread! Customers would walk away in their thousands.

It's the converse that is happening here, the airport have said you pay us this amount an in return we promise to deliver X service level (wether it be buses or queue times etc) but they are not meeting this level. So going by your theory the Airlines should get a REDUCTION in charges because LBA is not meeting the targets and service levels that THEY agree on. In stead they are now wanting to increase the Airlines overheads by demanding more staffin levels yet still offer a less than satisfactory service. There is no logic behind that theory other than they are greedy and simply cannot manage their finances correctly. They have realised that their passenger number projections were way off and now are trying to re-coup their pitiful investment in what ever way they can. It's clearly not working.

Airlines choose to operate out of LBA because there is a market, however factors such as this shambles brings into question if it really is worth an operation at LBA if all you get is complains from customers about the shoddy facilities. We will never know what the full reasonings behind the bmi regional pull out is, but they have been less than pleased with LBA for a few years. Stand 3 was built specifically for bmi as LBA started parking the embraer on stand 16, needing buses and of course bmi had an agreement regarding buses and LBA consistently messed up and didn't meet the target. Threats were made and suddenly stand 3 appears. This is not a way to run a business and encourage LBA's customers (the airlines) to grow their business there. It should not come to a stage where Airlines have to make threats just because the Airport management don't stick to their agreed contract. It's pitiful and as I'm sure you can tell, infuriates me.

I heard today that the escalator procedure is currently under review in light of the number of complains an pressure from Airlines - be interesting to see what comes of it. I know of late, one large operator at Leeds have been persistently calling the Terminal Managers until the escalator is turned on. If it was possible, I'd love all the forum members to come witness a full 757 use those stairs (which were designed at the time the most common aircraft at LBA was a 40 seat Embraer) and witness the elderly, less mobile, disabled and families plus around 200 other people pushing past and see what their thoughts are. It's a sickening sight, people have fallen and hurt themselves, the lift only fits 2 people in and is about 500 years old, often does not work. In this day in age it simply is not good enough to not offer any alternative than climb a steep flight of stairs at an 'international' airport.

I think I've done this subject to death now, I bet if anyone passes through the Airport this summer, the escalator will remain turned off or operated only when there is Jet2 staff stood there making sure the Airport are actually doing something about it. Please share your experiences on here and if it is less than satisfactory please complain to the Airport otherwise nothing will ever get done about it.

 

[SNOWMAN]

I agree that if the airport and the airline enter into a contract to provide a service at £x price, then of course there is an obligation to provide this service. However, if the airlines want the airport to undertake major investments to make it a bigger and better airport then the airlines should reasonably expect to pay more.

hi ls16
if the airport charge charge the airlines more then they would charge the pax more to use lba,then what big drop in pax numbers routes cut back,less choice then back to man we go,that would put lba back 10 years and we dont that.i am a user of lba and have been for many years,but in 2112 we used doncaster twice with thompsons in stead of jet 2 to the same hotels its a much better airport than lba,no problems air side no long walk no steps to climb.come on lba sort this out before you piss the faithful off.
regards
sm1

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

They really ideally need that expansion out front where the old parking bays, roads etc are. I would say it needs to happen from October and be finished for Summer 2014. This will create a larger ground floor area (thus larger ground floor arrivals), and a larger departure area. Its the only way forward.

LBIA, do we have a time scale the aiport has put forward for these things to change? Or they just going to be LBA and sit and wait?

 

[White Heather]

Interesting debate and some good points raised, all of which illustrate that passenger numbers are growing faster than the terminal's capability to handle them. I have always held the view that 'tarting up' the existing terminal was the wrong choice and in the long run the more expensive option. A completely new terminal, on two levels, should have been built where the lower short term car park is now, with arrivals downstairs and departures upstairs. Once completed, the current terminal should have been removed and the apron extended down towards the new terminal. LBA would then have had a terminal capable of handling whatever was thrown at it and enough parking space for a lot more aircraft. In the longer term, I doubt it would have cost any more. LBA has been subjected to quick fix after quick fix over the years, and this is another one. I suspect that an owner that is in it for the long haul might have gone down the new terminal route, but Investment companies are not in for the long haul and ultimately aim to sell at a profit. Whether we see them carry out the developments that are clearly necessary to resolve the arrivals nightmare, will depend on how long they plan to be around. Selling up with inadequate arrivals facilities and a bunch of unhappy airlines will do nothing to enhance the sale price - but on the other hand if they are intending to sell within the next few years they may well be tempted to leave it for the new owners to sort out.

Even the new terminal extension that has planning consent will not resolve these problems which are all at the other side of the building. It is to be hoped that they ensure that these matters are brought into the equation and not left. From my perspective, they are now the single most important matter to be addressed - LBA might be able to get away for a limited period upsetting customers, but if the airlines are unhappy, they are playing with fire. It takes very little for Ryanair to walk away and it isn't a good idea to upset them by making demands such as this.

All that said, the fact remains that LBA are spending in excess of £20m which is presumably all the money allocated to the airport by Bridgepoint Capital. I have no doubt at all that all the annoyance and frustration of the airlines will be having an impact and messages will be going up the line to Head Office requesting a further capital injection at the earliest opportunity. Bridgepoint will be balancing their available funding across all their portfolio - so lets hope the significant increase in pax this coming summer highlights the problems and ensures funding for a solution is forthcoming, and quick.

I can only reiterate what has already been said - making the point on here is good for the forum but achieves little. I can and will pass on the disquiet, but it really is essential that if anyone is unhappy with the experience, they write to LBA management to express it.

It is a shame that lbia is airport based - the information provided by him would be most useful in generating debate at the consultative committee and perhaps 'shaming' LBA into action, but I would imagine it would be a risk submitting it given it is clear that the information is coming from an airline employee.

 

[a300boy]

White Heather.
How are members of the committee selected ? Does one apply or is it by invitaion.

 

[airforced]

......................... LBA might be able to get away for a limited period upsetting customers, but if the airlines are unhappy, they are playing with fire. It takes very little for Ryanair to walk away and it isn't a good idea to upset them by making demands such as this.

........... .............I can only reiterate what has already been said - making the point on here is good for the forum but achieves little. I can and will pass on the disquiet, but it really is essential that if anyone is unhappy with the experience, they write to LBA management to express it.

Sorry to abbreviate your last post White Heather but the above words lead to my reason for making this post.

I would be very surprised - shocked even - if LBA management didn't have a regular look at the forum to see what was being said by users (and friends) of the airport. In fact I would consider it a dereliction of duty if that wasn't the case.

Are you aware of who has a look at this forum and if it hasn't ever featured in any discussions perhaps you might make people aware of it?

If they aren't aware of what is being said and the concerns being expressed I think they ought to be made aware. Us writing letters to the MD would be time consuming for both parties and wouldn't achieve anything more that a good read of what is being said on here would accomplish.

 

[ls27]

White Heather, I think what you have put is very well said and reflective on what might happen. Was this not a similar pattern as to what happened at Birmingham with Bridgepoint Capital?

 

[lbaspotter]

It looks like a sports bar is opening up somewhere within the Terminal Building as LBIA have just posted the following message on its Facebookpage.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/OfficialLeedsBradfordAirport

Opening tomorrow is the new Sports Bar, chill out with Pool, Air Hockey and Table Footbal or just check Sky Sports before your flight

Didn't know about this one, So where about's has this been fitted?

 

[White Heather]

Hi Airforced, the LBA management are no doubt aware of this forum as I have mentioned comments made on here at almost every meeting I have attended since I became a member in 2009. Nothing has ever been said however to indicate than any of them are readers so I do not expect that they will be aware directly - unless of course any of them are 'secret' members, in which case they are hopefully taking what is said on board.

The airport MD, John Parkin has said on a number of occasions however, that if passengers have complaints or something to say, he would rather they write to him than to a newspaper who then put their own spin on things anyway. He has always said he will respond and explain. Unfortunately it appears that there is some mistrust of Bridgepoint, so whatever is said, it seems likely that they will be accused of all talk and doing nowt.

Personally I fully understand the anger - particularly if the airport is upsetting airlines through a failure to comply with Service Level Agreements. With regard to terminal developments, I take a realistic view that in the current situation, funding would not be available to do everything at once - nor would it be practical to do so unless there was an ability to cope with major works ongoing through the summer - which there most certainly isn't (and that brings me back to my earlier point a new build terminal being the best, long term option). Had LBA spent the money first on arrivals, no doubt they would be critcised for not improving departures. Had they split the money between both, we would have ended up with a half hearted effort that didn't really impove anything significantly. Nevertheless, there is clearly a problem with an airport that is capable of handling 3m pax outbound but struggles to cope with the same number coming back.

LS27, yes, Bridgepoint bought Birmingham and sold it some years later at a profit. To be fair, they did manage to transform the place and set it on its way to significant growth. They are an investment company so it is what they do. Clearly they are not that popular with some on here - but consider some of the other options. Some bidders had no real experience of running an airport. We could have ended up with a lot worse. Heaven forbid that MAG bought LBA - they could have made a real success of it, but equally they could have syphoned off passenger throughput, directing them to MAN or EMA instead of investing in developing LBA. Very much a case of 'be careful what you wish for'.

 

[EX9]

It looks like a sports bar is opening up somewhere within the Terminal Building as LBIA have just posted the following message on its Facebookpage.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/OfficialLeedsBradfordAirport

Opening tomorrow is the new Sports Bar, chill out with Pool, Air Hockey and Table Footbal or just check Sky Sports before your flight

Didn't know about this one, So where about's has this been fitted?

It's within the shell of the now old 'Danby Bar'. It has been closed over the winter months.
Security also switched over to its new layout on the 18th making the fast track lane enter through a new door not far from the boarding pass scanning podium. Meaning more space is allocated for preparation where the queuing would primarily take place if you were facing the scanners in the old layout.

 

[lbaspotter]

Thanks for clearing that up EBC-S9. I had wondered what would be put in its place....

Can you confirm if the extra security lanes and scanners have been added as planned, now that the area layout has been turned around?
Its good to hear the fast track process will be a lot easier from now on as well. Hopefully these little changes will make for a better experience in that area of the terminal Building...

 

[airforced]

White Heather.
How are members of the committee selected ? Does one apply or is it by invitaion.

I came across this link re the committee a300boy which probably answers your question. http://www.leedsbradfordairport.co.uk/a ... -committee

Hope this helps.

 

[a300boy]

Thanks for that airforced. It looks like its a nominated members only setup so I will have to do a bit of investigation.

 

[BigMac]

Thanks for clearing that up EBC-S9. I had wondered what would be put in its place....

Can you confirm if the extra security lanes and scanners have been added as planned, now that the area layout has been turned around?
Its good to hear the fast track process will be a lot easier from now on as well. Hopefully these little changes will make for a better experience in that area of the terminal Building...

At the moment security are still running with the same amount of x ray machines and awtmd's. I did get told today when the additional equipment will arrive but I've forgotten already....hard day haha. The current lay out looks to me like its reduced the work space for the security team to work in but I'm assured that its only temporary

 

[White Heather]

There will be 6 security scanners in place by Easter - a 50% increase.