Infrastructure, Construction & Developments

[superking]

My daughter and hubby came up from north devon yesterday and they used the first flight of the day with klm to ams. They using the first flight of the day back into brs next sunday.I asked why use brs and daughters reply was no other airline could get any where near klm s. They booked the flight 5 weeks ago.I will try and get what they paid for return tickets.

 

[tpm]

BBC West reflects on the airport at 60 and en passant mentions that ..

Bristol Airport is celebrating 60 years of passenger flights today and says it hopes to double its size over the next few years to handle as many as 15 million passengers.

Accompanied of course by a short interview with TLY's bête noire Simon Calder who reflects thoughtfully on the airport's poor surface connectivity and says with a smirk that he might just go and fly from Cardiff instead.

 

[g3jetman]

Morning all....reflecting on the BBC interview with Mr Negative (Simon Calder) on the 60th Birthday celebrations!!
Is there only one person in the United Kingdom with travel knowledge...I find it hard to believe he is the only spokesperson out there...he never has a good word for BRS! BRS has fought hard and achieved so much for us to be able to travel to so many destinations.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

BBC West reflects on the airport at 60 and en passant mentions that ..



Accompanied of course by a short interview with TLY's bête noire Simon Calder who reflects thoughtfully on the airport's poor surface connectivity and says with a smirk that he might just go and fly from Cardiff instead.

Actually he did in his recorded interview, then when he was interviewed live he said that APD devolution to Wales would make little difference to Bristol Airport because Cardiff Airport was just as inaccessible with equally poor surface links.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Morning all....reflecting on the BBC interview with Mr Negative (Simon Calder) on the 60th Birthday celebrations!!
Is there only one person in the United Kingdom with travel knowledge...I find it hard to believe he is the only spokesperson out there...he never has a good word for BRS! BRS has fought hard and achieved so much for us to be able to travel to so many destinations.

I watched the evening BBC West tv news programme Points West today (it was broadcast live from the airport) and Mr Calder was on again; not live but but clearly filmed at the airport either earlier today or recently.

His recorded interview, parts of which were broadcast on this morning's Radio Bristol News, were entirely negative. He said that if Brexit goes badly all but about 10 of BRS's 200 flights a day would be no more (if that was the case it would apply to all UK airports but the impression was given that BRS would be particularly badly impacted).

In fact the overall tenor of Points West and its BRS reporting this evening was entirely negative with not only Mr Calder (who said last year that BRS was falling behind its competitors - you couldn't make it up and I haven't) pointing out:

the potential disaster of Brexit

surface access where both Mr Calder and BBC West's business editor thought surface access would be a block on real future progress (Mr Calder said he doesn't know any airport anywhere of similar size with such poor surface connectivity)

competition from Wales with the attractiveness of no APD if the tax is devolved, with Mr Calder saying airlines and passengers would go to Cardiff, yet in his live interview on Radio Bristol this morning he said categorically that APD devolution would have little effect on BRS (you couldn't make it up and I haven't - again)

nimbyism, with the local champion who is always wheeled out on such occasions spouting her usual stuff about 'we don't want the airport expanding'

Mr Calder seems to have done some research since last week though when he said he thought BRS would now be chasing Emirates and Etihad. Someone must have told him that Emirates could not operate at BRS - its aircraft are too big - so today he contented himself by merely citing Etihad as a target.

With BRS now saying they are looking at 15 mppa in the future the message on today's local media was that the main impediment was poor surface access with the A38 mentioned time and again. Now I well remember when the airport was around 3 mppa (at the time the master plan was being prepared) so-called experts were saying the same thing about the airport's projection of 8 mppa by 2015 - the roads couldn't cope.

I use the A38 at least once a week on weekdays in both directions and it isn't that busy between city boundary and airport most of the time (at commuter time things might be different). Of course a rail or tram link would be marvellous but we have to be realistic.

Like you g3jetman, I find it odd that other 'experts' cannot be found to give a view rather than the never-short-of-an-opinion SC. It's actually lazy journalism on the part of the news media companies who don't bother to look for anyone else.

 

[Jerry]

To be fair to Bristol the access restrictions haven't hindered them one bit and I don't think they will in the future. They have the products and attract the passengers and the A38 and no trains don't seem to stop people from using the airport.

 

[kraktoa]

The airport i believe is not too pleased with the negative spin put by BBC in its new coverage on what the airport considered a celebratory event. I spoke with a director who was mad that BBC concentrated more on the road links, brexit issues and also mentioned Cardiff. He particularly disliked the Calder statement that ...Out of 100 flights only 10 could take off to Europe after Brexit if deals not finalised.....

 

[Marko1]

I thought the whole press thing was very poor to be honest and mr Calder is particularly negative in his views. Indeed I don't recall a positive thing he has said about brs. It should have been a day of celebration. Points to note are the comments about it needing a bigger runway are all well and good but if they ever attempted those things then you better your bottom dollar the focus by the press would be on the negatives and not the positives.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

That runway and other matters

With the news this week that BRS has increased its long term aim from 10 mppa to 15 mppa there has been a lot of talk about the airport’s future, fuelled mainly by the 60th birthday celebrations of the opening of the Lulsgate facility when it was moved from the former airport site at Whitchurch.

This week the airport has issued a press release that includes this paragraph:

Over the coming months we will be updating our existing Master Plan, setting out long-term forecasts and future infrastructure requirements, to ensure we are best placed to meet this demand and these challenges. The views of customers, employees, neighbours and other stakeholders will be essential in shaping the Airport’s future so we will be consulting widely on our current thinking later this year.”

https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/ab...bristol-airport-celebrates-60-years-of-flying

It will be interesting to see the period to be covered by the new master plan. The current one covers the period until 2015 in detail and from 2015 to 2030 on an outline basis.

Although I haven’t heard it mentioned this week I wonder whether the time has come to re-visit the case for a runway extension. The airport has always said that the matter will be kept under review and now appears ready to mount a challenge to the 10 mppa planning consents limit.

Currently the runway is 381 metres shorter than Cardiff’s 2,392 metre runway, with some saying that one of the reasons that Qatar opted to go there instead of BRS were the superior operating conditions.

In its current master plan BRS has listed several options for runway extension, all at eastern end of the airfield. However, the one that might be the most appropriate, having regard to all circumstances, is option 3 which would extend the runway by 389m with the master plan saying:

This has been assessed as the maximum extension that can be accommodated within the existing airport land. The end of the runway clear and graded area would then be at the boundary with Felton Common. The ILS localiser and, potentially approach lighting as well, would need to relocated on to the Common and a 240m by 150m area of the Common would need to come into airport control. It may be necessary to regrade parts of the Common.

The A38 would have to be dropped into a tunnel about 150 metres long as it would for the minimum option which is to extend the runway by 140 metres, and for a midway option which would see a 239 metre extension and a 150 metre starter strip, which would give runway 27 an extra 389 metres of take-off availability but only 150 metres on runway 09.

Anything beyond a runway extension of 389 metres would require significant occupation of Felton Common.

Any attempt to extend the runway would be met with intense opposition and another problem is that the common has been designated a local nature reserve by the local authority. However, with the Bristol area requiring tens of thousands of new houses in the next decade or so it seems inevitable that some of them will have to be built on Green Belt land. That might be the time to try to get some of the Green Belt land around the airport re-assigned too, so that some sort of cargo facility might then be a viable consideration.

If the airport is really serious about reaching 15 mppa in the future it seems pretty certain that it will need considerably better surface connectivity, yet more terminal space, more aircraft parking stands and, ideally, a longer runway. It might get by without the first and the last but both would open up so many more options.

 

[Marko1]

Funnily enough I was only thinking about that runway. To be honest I think they need to go for it even without the prospect of long haul schedule traffic. It will remove one of the biggest barriers to expansion. I have concerns post 757 on the performance of the 737max etc and what those implications might be for brs . That situation will have to be addressed pretty shortly. If they are going to go for an extension I think it's better to go for the longest possible. Then let's see what those critics will say.

 

[Jerry]

Funnily enough I was only thinking about that runway. To be honest I think they need to go for it even without the prospect of long haul schedule traffic. It will remove one of the biggest barriers to expansion. I have concerns post 757 on the performance of the 737max etc and what those implications might be for brs . That situation will have to be addressed pretty shortly. If they are going to go for an extension I think it's better to go for the longest possible. Then let's see what those critics will say.

According to the Boeing website the MAX takeoff capabilities are similar to the NG. The problem though then will be the MAX 9 because if it has a similar takeoff to the 737 900er then it will need more runway than BRS has from what i've heard about it.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

According to the Boeing website the MAX takeoff capabilities are similar to the NG. The problem though then will be the MAX 9 because if it has a similar takeoff to the 737 900er then it will need more runway than BRS has from what i've heard about it.

In a major article about BRS in an aviation magazine this month Robert Sinclair, the BRS CEO, when asked about longer routes said, "New aircraft like the 737 MAX and the A321LR will help..........." The snag with new types or new derivations is that they don't always meet the manufacturers' pre-production claims when actually flying. We shall have to wait and see.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Funnily enough I was only thinking about that runway. To be honest I think they need to go for it even without the prospect of long haul schedule traffic. It will remove one of the biggest barriers to expansion. I have concerns post 757 on the performance of the 737max etc and what those implications might be for brs . That situation will have to be addressed pretty shortly. If they are going to go for an extension I think it's better to go for the longest possible. Then let's see what those critics will say.

In the aviation magazine article I mentioned in my previous post, Robert Sinclair said "We (the airport) don't really see a need to extend the runway".

 

[big g]

The new stands 27,28,29 are now operational, stands 28,29 are tow/push on/off. Some other regs with these stands as well that to be honest are a bit odd!

 

[Jerry]

The new stands 27,28,29 are now operational, stands 28,29 are tow/push on/off. Some other regs with these stands as well that to be honest are a bit odd!

Odd how?

 

[Jono577]

? stand numbers, 27 has never existed, 28 & 29 have been in use for some time or so it looks on the docking info sheet from the caa.

 

[Jono577]

See chart attached.

 

[g3jetman]

I think you'll find the New Stands are 37,38 and 39

 

[big g]

Sorry yes 37-39, it was late when I posted.

Stand 37 is under the same curfew as stands 34-36 can be used 0700-2300
Stands 38-39 have a 24/7 curfew, aircraft can only be towed on/off the stands with no Engines or APU's running. Passengers can board aircraft but not de-board.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Are these the regulations that you described as a 'bit odd' in an earlier post? The new stands seem to have an earth embankment behind them and the 'outside world' and anyway there are few houses nearby. Furthermore, aircraft using the nearby taxiway must make as much noise and these are operating through the 24 hours albeit there is of course a night quota count for all movements between 2330 and 0600.