DfT UK airport passenger numbers forecast 2020-2050

[TheLocalYokel]

In August this year the Department for Transport issued a detailed report (172 pages in .pdf format) forecasting future UK aviation trends between 2010 and 2050, taking into account such things as the effects of economic growth, carbon emissions, oil price and constraints on the expansion of some airports.

The report is very wordy and full of figures, graphs and tables but does include annual passenger forecasts for most of the UK airports. The report admits there are variables but gives a mid range annual passenger numbers figure for the years 2020 and 2040. For the years 2030 and 2050 the figures are further broken down into low, central and high forecasts.

How accurate these figures will turn out to be is anyone's guess. I'm treating them with the greatest scepticism. For example, Plymouth Airport, due to close soon, is forecast to be handling 2 mppa by 2050.

Anyone wanting to read the report can access it at the below link. A word of warning though – sometimes a box saying the file is damaged and irretrievable will appear. I found that perseverance eventually gained access to the file.

I've extrapolated the figures for the current top 20 UK airports by passenger numbers for 2020 and 2050 which I reproduce below. The DfT is not anticipating much growth at many regional airports between now and 2020.

How much it's cost the country to come up with all this I shudder to think. I suggest the average spotter's prediction would be as valid. Nevertheless, I decided to publicise the report if only for amusement.

2020

Heathrow 80 mppa
Gatwick 35
Manchester 25
Stansted 25
Luton 12
Edinburgh 13
Birmingham 20
Glasgow 7
Bristol 6
Newcastle 5
Belfast Int 6
Liverpool 5
East Midlands 3
Aberdeen 3
Leeds-Bradford 3
Prestwick 2
Belfast City 3
London City 7
Southampton 2
Cardiff 1

2050 (low forecast to high forecast)

Those airports with only one figure indicates the same forecast for passenger numbers in the low, middle and high models.

Heathrow 85 mppa
Gatwick 40
Manchester 45-55
Stansted 30-35
Luton 15
Edinburgh 20
Birmingham 25
Glasgow 11-20
Bristol 12
Newcastle 6-20
Belfast Int 9-25
Liverpool 8-20
East Midlands 11-25
Leeds-Bradford 7-12
Prestwick 2-9
Aberdeen 4-10
Belfast City 4
London City 6-8
Southampton 6-7
Cardiff 3-12

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/u ... ecasts.pdf

 

[TheLocalYokel]

It must be the winter silly season for the newspapers because one or two have taken up this 'forecast' and given it more importance than most of us on Forums4airports have done.

The press reports have led to comments in some of the Dried Plum threads and some of them seem to have taken the figures seriously, although I've yet to read a comment from an industry professional from that forum on these lines.

It seems that Forums has been way ahead of the national press and the DP with this.

Maybe the press picked it up from us.

 

[Aviador]

Isn't it always the silly season for newspapers TheLocalYokel?

The DfT come up with the most bizarre instructions and it make you wonder what makes them tick. Until now only those of us who work at airports have been privy to these ridiculous meaningless instructions they come up with.

The majority of people who work at UK airports think the DfT have lost all credibility. For the flying public the most obvious pathetic DfT ruling was the introduction of the resealable bag for liquids. A channel 4 documentary proved it was possible to cause significant damage to an aircraft with less than 70ml of liquid explosive. Despite this the pathetic DfT say it is acceptable to take up to 1Ltr in containers containing up to 100ml.

The DfT rulings don't stop there. More recently they stopped transiting passengers who had cleared security at their departure airport have to disembark their flights to be re-screened by security before going on to their final destination? I would say it's getting to the point where the day to day running of airports is being severely curtailed by mindless rules made by these people.

Now these idiots are releasing this kind of ridiculous information publicly, all is becoming clear to those people who were previously out of the loop. These figures appear to be randomly picked and they could have easily been chosen by the national lottery's Lancelot machine.

I am sure it's all about trying to justify their position to ensure they stay in a job but they need a reality check. They need to adopt a common sense way of doing things.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

What you say doesn't surprise me in the least, Aviador.

The .pdf document that is the home to this mountain of figures, supposition and, in reality, simply guesswork is 172 pages long and contains scores of graphs, tables, equations and every type of scenario that can be envisaged, so that in the end it covers all eventualities and is consequently meaningless.

That's bad enough but I shudder to think how much public money it took to produce. The only saving grace is that it probably reduced the unemployment figures by 20 or 30 but the people involved would not be lowly paid.

 

[Aviador]

In a recent article posted by Pug, it quoted a Humberside airport manager mentioning these projected figures which suggested Humberside airport would be handling up to 10 million passengers a year. The article sounded achievable and believable until the DfT quote. If I were an airport manager I would steer clear of using the DfT rhetoric in press releases.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I remember pug's post and I recall he was very sceptical of the claim as well.

In the winter 'silly season' between last Christmas and New Year (the 'dog days' I call them) two or three national newspapers very belatedly discovered this DfT nonsense (it had been in the public domain for several months by then) and made much out of nothing.

According to the DfT the closed Plymouth Airport will be handing 2-3 mppa within 20 or 30 years.

I'd like to think I would be around to see it; first, to last that long and second, to see a remarkable turnaround of this Phoenix rising from the ashes.