Future Infrastructure Developments

[rmac]

I think in the short term anyway the airport would be good to attract more routes to mainland Europe if it can, some of which are hub airports. Brussels comes to mind. There used to be an excellent service to Brussels in the past. I would expect Aer Lingus Regional to open up Dublin and possibly Cork. The airport needs regular, that is daily flights to Copenhagen, Frankfurt, Munich, Oslo, Madrid, Lisbon, Istanbul as examples so that it does not just be a bucket and spade airport.

 

[SNOWMAN]

hi rmac
I agree with your daily flight list,but we have to remember that these flights have been in operation for some time from the other side of the hill, I seem to remember some time ago the lady in charge of luffty said lba no chance why should I dilute man by starting lba and this is the main problem lba has to face,the problem lies with past management from years ago.from what I here from people in the industry the present
management never stop trying for new routes etc,but I still think lba future growth is in the bucket and spade holidays and jet2,where would we be to-day pax wise with out them.
just my thoughts
regards sm1

 

[rmac]

Yes I appreciate there is a difficulty with Lufthansa however the airport seems to be successful with Barcelona, Rome, Prague, maybe Dusseldorf and now Copenhagen albeit 2 weekly and with a population on the doorstep it should be able to sustain many more flights to European destinations even if the likes of AF & LH are reluctant. How does Edinburgh with a much smaller catchment area have all these flights and it continues to grow and has Glasgow, a very successful airport, not that far away. Ok its true Edinburgh does attract a huge inbound tourist trade which greatly helps, but I am thinking that LBA needs to attract many more business travellers than it does now. The Yorkshire bound tourist is on the increase and this will be good for the airport, but how many foreign tourists think - lets visit Yorkshire and automatically think - we need to fly to Manchester.
I think there is growth to be had but it will take effort, and money to get it. Also visitors need to think - hey what a good airport that was when flying through LBA and they will do it again, and again. Hence the airport needs to be at its best, including surface transport!

 

[leedsman]

Some more concrete for the runway would be nice, but there must be massive potential out there using the runway we already have.

We are still lacking massively with interlining feeder services, and I see this as a gap which LBA needs to sort out before going for long haul direct. Getting frequent services, with small/mid sized aircraft into the main European hubs, will surely help the city region far more than a few weekly flights to Dubai or Doha. In my view, there are so many European destinations which need connecting into, before the middle east and beyond is even looked at.

KLM - have got it spot on at Leeds, with a frequent and reliable service / good times, and they open up the Sky Team alliance from LBA. The imminent upgrade to the E190 is great news, given the better performance in low-vis conditions. This is the kind of service Leeds should have to all the major European hubs.

Air France - Maybe the successful operation KLM have from Leeds, might be noted by their sister airline. Flights to CDG with AF/Hop would be a welcome addition, and they serve many cities which KLM don't operate to.

BA - great addition, just hope it is given the time to allow the route to settle in fully. The night-stopper is the key drawback currently, but that has been well covered on here already.

SAS - hopefully the CPH service will grow, as the SAS network opens up Scandinavia like no other carrier can offer. In time, it would be good to see the CPH service becoming more frequent, and having a greater business traveller appeal.

Lufthansa - big gap in the market, and would open up the world of star alliance from LBA again. I know they are very happy at MAN but they should be a priority target for LBA. KLM prove that the LBA/MAN operations can be successful alongside each other. The new runway at FRA can only help the case.

Aer Lingus Regional - this is one which I am amazed LBA doesn't have already. Would be a real advantage for US bound travellers to have the pre-clearance.

Brussels Airlines - has been proved before from Leeds, as Sabena was managing passenger numbers something in the order of 11,000 per month. I appreciate Brussels Airlines don't have the connection network which Sabena had, but they do have a strong route network to African destinations, which other carriers don't offer.

Turkish - for me, a lower priority than those hubs closer to home, but I think a better fit for Leeds given their 737 fleet, as opposed to the larger aircraft used by the major middle east carriers.

If I had some concrete, it would be for more parking stands and not the green fields at the end of the runway.

Just my thoughts....let the debate commence...

 

[User0001]

"I am not the slightest bit interested in the economic climate and nor should anyone else be."
Fortunately the directors and shareholders have an interest.
To trade insolvent is a criminal offense in the u.k. The last 6 years has seen this country go through the worst financial crisis since the 30's. Brought on by banks lending against lunatic projections by companies in the early years of this century.
Bridgepoint should have our thanks that they have curbed their capital expenditure in the last 6 years.
Bridgepoint will have to go to there bankers with their new masterplan for LBA, it will be the bankers who decide whether it is credible to finance any new development at LBA.
Bringing in new owners will not solve this financial, money is raised from share holders, bond holders or banks, they want to see a return on their money.
I believe LBA should concentrate on developing links to hub airports and forget about any aim to be a long haul airport. The airport is never going to have the infrastructure to support this aim.

Yes but you completely and utterly miss my point Tarn Spotter. I'm not saying a company should spend money it hasn't got. What I am saying is that you are of absolutely no use to LBIA if you don't have the necessary funds to do the job that was and still is critically needed (and indeed should have been written into the contract of sale.) There is no sentiment in business. Do the job or clear off. You don't want to spend money without a guarantee of a return? Tough Bridgepoint - you should have thought of what might happen before agreeing to buy the airport. Right now and for the last seven years the Yorkshire public are being let down and there are no excuses. Should we keep quiet because those that promised to upgrade the airport now have decided they cannot do it? - Absolutely not. We need the job doing - end of story. If you paid a builder to build an extension and then he told you he couldn't afford the bricks, would you say no problem mate times are tough!? It is a very clear job - spend money on our a airport and do what the councils admitted they could not do. Every Yorkshire person should be demanding that LBIA stops playing at being an airport and actually becomes an airport.

It really is not about being a long haul airport it is about being an airport that befits the region, is progressive, and realises it's potential instead of letting that potential leak away to others airports whose management are able to do what is required. It really is time the people of this region stopped accepting 2nd best status like timid little mouses. We are a massive massive important region in Britain and Europe. The reason why Manchester airport is where it is now is because it has for years had the complete opposite attitude of some of the defeatist apologist posters on this forum.

 

[User0001]

There is a possibility that I come over as a little critical of LBIAs owners from time to time but I have even less respect for the local council and its complete inertia in supporting LBIA. They have waved goodbye to millions upon millions of pounds over the years because of their shortsightedness. Money that Manchester airport have accepted only too happily.

 

[Bigman]

So what chance do we have when it was the council leader that started off the idea of a new airport.

 

[Tarn Spotter]

LufcPete: I think you missed my point.
Would have been crazy for any developer to spent money at LBA over the last 6 years, whether the money there or not.
We all have different need from the local airport. I am a local resident I dont want manchester on my door step. In 1987 I voted for 24/7 flying hours to allow the airport to expand and support the region.
Frankly I dont want A380's etc., at LBA, I wish LBA to expand by becoming a feeder to hubs for those that want to go long haul. This will not in my view, restrict the needs of anyone who wants to fly to any destination.
Shortly due to our political leaders we will lose LHR as a hub airport as it is now too late to develop to the size needed.
B A have already in management terms moved to madrid, where the forward thinking government has invested in the future.
Rawdon, Guiseley, Horsforth etc must have some of the largest housing density in the u.k., you cant transplant an international airport in this area.
I am not trying to be a "not in my back garden", I love using my local airport, however, it does not mean I need to fly direct to my destination. Truthfully as long as I have got rid of my suitcases, I am happy, have already used the LBA-LHR service as a stepping off point.
I will support most action of the airport owners, but not if it means another manchester on the doorstep, we dont need two in 60 miles.

 

[Aviador]

I think you missed my point.
Would have been crazy for any developer to spent money at LBA over the last 6 years, whether the money there or not.

It was wise not to go spending money during the financial crisis but many other airports are now spending money. Manchester, Birmingham and Bristol to name a few.

We all have different need from the local airport. I am a local resident I dont want Manchester on my door step. In 1987 I voted for 24/7 flying hours to allow the airport to expand and support the region.
Frankly I dont want A380's etc., at LBA

You and me both. Most people have a sense of realism about expansion at LBA and I am sure everybody with any sense will realise there is no chance of LBA ever becoming like Manchester, not now, not ever. In any case the A380 was designed to be an intercontinental aircraft operating from hub airports.

I wish LBA to expand by becoming a feeder to hubs for those that want to go long haul. This will not in my view, restrict the needs of anyone who wants to fly to any destination.

That is exactly my point. Many of the feeder services actually are classed as long haul flights such as the ones operating to Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Doha.

Shortly due to our political leaders we will lose LHR as a hub airport as it is now too late to develop to the size needed.

If LBA doesn't equip itself to deal with flights to other major hub airports LBA will miss out yet again.

Rawdon, Guiseley, Horsforth etc must have some of the largest housing density in the u.k., you cant transplant an international airport in this area.

I strongly disagree and if anywhere suffers from housing density in the UK it is Heathrow. There are plans to significantly increase housing in Leeds and in the Aireborough area and I strongly oppose any further housing developments in the area particularly when there are so many brown-field sites nearer the centre of Leeds.

I am not trying to be a "not in my back garden", I love using my local airport, however, it does not mean I need to fly direct to my destination. Truthfully as long as I have got rid of my suitcases, I am happy, have already used the LBA-LHR service as a stepping off point.

To an extent I agree but there are so many destinations that are already within reach of LBA yet the landing distance available is marginal. This is deterring new airlines from coming to LBA and it is deterring airlines already using LBA from operating flight to destinations further afield.

One example is Orlando, we know it is possible to operate flights to Orlando. Airlines are reluctant to use larger aircraft at LBA because of the available landing distance. Improving the landing distance will not only allow some longer routes to be served it will also improve the operational capabilities of all flights currently using LBA. It doesn't necessarily mean the physical paved area needs to be increase although short starter extensions perhaps on both ends of the runway would improve the distances available sufficiently to allow a greater range of destinations.

I will support most action of the airport owners, but not if it means another Manchester on the doorstep, we dont need two in 60 miles.

I think you are being a little excessive there. There is absolutely no chance of LBA becoming "another Manchester" . Even if LBA was proactive with it's expansion plans it would never become like Manchester airport.

LBA has scope for perhaps an additional 150m concrete on both ends on the runway that's about 2550m paved area which would be just less than what Birmingham had prior to it's new runway extension. An extended runway at LBA would still have restrictions but the distances available would be sufficiently improved to allow a modest number of long haul scheduled and charter operations allowing LBA to at least tap into some of the long haul scheduled and charter market.

 

[jason1-11]

There has been some really good debate of late on what we should expect, deserve from our Airport with the overriding theme being that in its current form the airport doesn’t meet the needs of the greater region. I look at the departure boards on a Wednesday in winter, or the heavily weighted bucket and spade low cost schedule with no business friendly routes apart from Dublin and Amsterdam, a diversion rate similar to Gatwick all be it not last winter whilst Manchester goes from strength to strength. Surely a city and region of our stature deserves better.

There is no reason why we shouldn’t aspire to emulate Newcastle, but this will only come about with investment and a lot of it. Are Bridgepoint the best one’s to deliver this or can they – only time will tell, but we need to grasp the nettle now as I for one will be massively disappointed if we don’t have an enhanced Terminal, more stands and a greater LDA in the next 3- 5 years.

 

[a300boy]

Just having enough runway length to allow occasional long haul operations and normal operations of the types we already see, including autoland capability, at max landing weights would be sufficient. I believe like Aviador this would attract new operators.
I appreciate this is not easily acheived but there now seems no will to resolve the B757 and probably the B738 landing problems we have in bad weather which will have an impact as Jet 2 replace the B733 fleet.

 

[lbaspotter]

As you all probably all know I agree with what's been said on here over last few days. I'm all for improvements been made to Leeds/Bradford Airport if it means more choice of routes been served.

But we have to be realistic and realize that not everything that's be posted on here/wish lits Eg Runway, Apron and Terminal extensions will happen overnight. Bridgepoint Capital will only spend money when they feel the time is right and its needed, also it's going to have to be feasible and the money is in place. What company in there right mind wouldn't? If not it's a recipe for disaster in this current economic climate. Especially after just coming out of the worst recession in recent times.

Well I suppose that's unless you can find someone really wealthy or another company who's willing to buy the airport and take over the rains from Bridgepoint. Then your expecting them to invest a load of money into the airport without any guarantee of making a return on the initial outlay for a good few years. I'm 100% sure they'll then have to find even more income revenue streams so to offset the losses incurred. Increased parking fees anyone?

So as the saying goes; They are damned if they do and damned if they don't" It's a no win situation as money always talks at the end off the day...

 

[scousefowler]

I think really to be fair, the financial aspect of LBA and Bridgepoint needs a lot of analysis before one can consider whether Bridgepoint could have invested more in LBA, whether LBA as an airport would be or would have been, better off with different owners.

Bridgepoint are a private equity investment organisation. They invest huge sums of money in assets that generate a return for their clients. This organisation of their structure may mean that a higher return on investment is demanded as opposed to say a PLC with shareholders. This could mean that some projects will never get the go-ahead compared with a PLC, because a PLC may have a lower return on investment threshold. Their could also be a differing attitude to debt between the two differing types of organisation.

Now to attempt to analyse the amount of investment at LBA I would suggest one would need financial reports before they took over say 3-5yrs, and then financial reports ever since they took over. The information within these reports should identify money invested. Whilst analysing this information one would also find it useful to compare and contrast with other airports of a similar size, and with other airport owners organisations and their structure. An analysis of trends within the airline industry during the same periods would also be helpful. Only then would we get a clearer picture.

Their would be other relevant financial information about LBA that I'm sure we would never be privy to, such as the amount of revenue the airlines bring into LBA. For example, with Jet2 looking to expand what is the amount of increased revenue extra apron space and parking stands for this company likely to produce? Are they on such a 'cheap' deal that it is not worth it? The same can be said for Ryanair. What about extra revenue from handling freight from increased apron space and parking stands?

I'm no aviation accounting expert but to me it seems an analysis of their investment record should be scrutinised to see whether the people of Yorkshire are getting an airport that meets their needs or whether the airport is merely generating a return for the investors in Bridgepoint Capital.

 

[Tarn Spotter]

Does anyone know how much Capital expenditure Bridgepoint has outlayed on LBA in the last 5 years and compare this say with Bristol an airport having twice the airport capicity. I would have though 2011/12 were very heavy years of capital expenditure.
We should really compare with London City/Aberdeen, they have a similar passenger movements.

 

[Aviador]

But we have to be realistic and realize that not everything that's be posted on here/wish lits Eg Runway, Apron and Terminal extensions will happen overnight.

Let me make this clear. What I have posted on here is not a wish list, it's a need list. I couldn't give a hoot about the LBA company but what I do care about is the prosperity of Leeds and the Leeds City Region which in my opinion is being let down by LBA.

Bridgepoint Capital will only spend money when they feel the time is right and its needed, also it's going to have to be feasible and the money is in place. What company in there right mind wouldn't? If not it's a recipe for disaster in this current economic climate. Especially after just coming out of the worst recession in recent times.

That's fine but the argument about the recession and economic climate is wearing thin. As I've already said, other airports are spending money right now.

Well I suppose that's unless you can find someone really wealthy or another company who's willing to buy the airport and take over the rains from Bridgepoint. Then your expecting them to invest a load of money into the airport without any guarantee of making a return on the initial outlay for a good few years. I'm 100% sure they'll then have to find even more income revenue streams so to offset the losses incurred. Increased parking fees anyone?

So as the saying goes; They are damned if they do and damned if they don't" It's a no win situation as money always talks at the end off the day...

Bridgepoint is a £billion business. They knew exactly what the job entailed when they took on the airport.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Does anyone know how much Capital expenditure Bridgepoint has outlayed on LBA in the last 5 years and compare this say with Bristol an airport having twice the airport capicity. I would have though 2011/12 were very heavy years of capital expenditure.
We should really compare with London City/Aberdeen, they have a similar passenger movements.

Bristol Airport is owned by Macquarie European Infrastructure Fund (50%), The Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan (49%) and Sydney Airport - formerly Map/Macquarie Airports- (1%).

MEIF has over £60 billion in assets and Teachers' over £100 billion Canadian $ assets so BRS is a very small part of both.

BRS as an airport has been continually evolving for over 15 years with around £100 million spent in that time. In recent years such things as the Western Walkway, the Central Walkway that's nearing completion, three new aircraft stands, new business lounge, turning much of landside into airside, expanded security and immigration stations have swallowed up in excess of £30 million. Prior to that big number items like the new terminal (completed in 2000), the diversion of the A 38 and a new control tower saw over £40 million shelled out. Numerous other smaller enhancements have been made and continue to be made that quite honestly become forgotten over time.

The current plans for which outline planning permission has been granted (and gained the secretary of state's approval as well as successfully fighting off a judicial review application form objectors) will cost up to £150 million and will include doubling the size of the current terminal, a new hotel, a public transport interchange, multi-storey car parking, additional stands and an Eastern walkway that will be built where the present admin block (formerly the old terminal) is situated (a new admin block will be built elsewhere on the airport site).

The walkways are really piers with pre-boarding zones.

The gradual expansion of the infrastructure will be carried out as increased traffic dictates to allow the airport to comfortably handle 10 mppa which is the maximum permitted by its planning consents. When the plans were first mooted a decade ago it was thought that the airport would be handling over 8 mppa by now and it was hoped to have put in place most of the amelioration by around 2015. The recession intruded which with a battle against a well-organised and well funded-opposition group delayed progress for several years.

BRS, like LBA, is in the wrong place, is restricted in size (especially the runway) with no rail connection and not the easiest road connectivity. It also has a much bigger airport not far away although of course LHR is not a big player in the sun holiday routes. Perhaps that's the main difference between BRS and LBA because, thanks mainly to easyJet although Ryanair, Aer Lingus Regional and SN Brussels also play their part, BRS has scheduled routes to (I think) 14 European capital cities, including Madrid, Lisbon and Copenhagen.

 

[Tarn Spotter]

Thanks for that update TheLocalYokel.
Am I misreading your thread if I say that it seems since the recession of 2008, capital expenditure at Bristol has been low and possibly lower then LBA.
In May 2007 Bridgepoint committed to invest 70 million on a airport they thought would be doing 3m by the end of 2008 (act 2.9m) and a steady growth to 7 million in 2015.
The facts are that last year 2013, we got to 2009 passenger numbers (3.3m). We are 4/5 years behind on the passengers numbers needed to justify the capital expenditure
If passenger numbers had not fallen sharply in 2009, over half a million on projections, maybe Bridgepoint would have been more bullish, who knows.
It should also be remembered that this was the period when M O L of Ryanair was holding a pistol to airport operators heads, not a good climate when the airline about to move more passengers then the rest, is prepared to move his base at the drop of a hat. Investors need certainty, not worry about the future.

 

[a300boy]

You could argue that Airlines need proper infrastructure with the potential to expand before committing themselves to a long term operation. Its swing and roundabouts and after todays expensive diversions ,which with more useable concrete would most likely not have happened, we might be saying goodbye to Jet 2 as a main base before long as they retrench across the hills.

 

[rmac]

Just out of interest does anyone know roughly what the likely cost of adding 300metres of concrete at LBA would be? Birmingham's extension is costing many millions, was it £45?

 

[a300boy]

It will have to go out to tender should it ever happen. If it does I would be happy to contribute a few quid !!