Airport Master Plan for next 30 Years - Consultation

[TheLocalYokel]

I saw an item about the master plan on BBC Points West local tv news earlier this evening. The reporter gave a brief outline of the three scenarios and actually did some walking outside the airport perimeter. Unsurprisingly, it was quite a negative report stressing all the obstacles and that the master plan numbers were little more than aspirations (local news media whether print, sound or visual seem to be like that in many places across the country when it comes to local airports).

So they must have been disappointed to find a local farmer whose house would probably have to be demolished for the second terminal scenario who was enthusiastically in favour, saying that there is a need for a bigger airport in the south west.

Incidentally, having grown up in the villages around the airport in the 1950s (it only became the airport in 1957) I still have connections with the 'old' village families, and they are far more likely to be in favour of the airport and its expansion than the 'newcomers' who have come into the villages over the past 40 odd years.

More to the tv people's liking was the appearance on camera of a local parish councillor who has been an active opponent of BRS expansion for many years. I was waiting for her to appear, so no surprise when she did.

I also heard a tiny part of an interview given to BBC Radio Bristol on this morning's early morning news programme when who else but the ubiquitous Simon Calder made a customary appearance. I've yet to hear him say anything positive about BRS and the bit I heard was a condemnation of the idea of a second terminal. I didn't hear the rest of the interview so he might have actually said something positive about the airport. Even at my age I can always be surprised.

 

[Coathanger16]

One additional stand being constructed this winter and serious rumour has it 2/3 more by summer 19, partly in the area currently occupied by the car park in front of the old terminal building.

Has relocating the fuel farm (and the structure to the north of the link way) ever been suggested to facilitate new stands? Looks like another 2 stands could be put there?

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Has relocating the fuel farm (and the structure to the north of the link way) ever been suggested to facilitate new stands? Looks like another 2 stands could be put there?

These are the current expansion plans for which planning consent has been obtained. Much of it has already been put in place with the eastern end the major bit still to be done. Part of the eastern end is likely to be started next year leading to another 2-3 stands.

Until the current new master plan consultation is over and done with and a new master plan produced we shan't know with any certainty how many or where new stands will be placed.

 

[kraktoa]

Does the masterplan for the next 20 years include the appointment of a new CEO?

 

[Jerry]

Is it me or is it a coincidence that both BRS and BHX haven't recruited CEOs yet? Both have significant ownership stakes by OTPP. Maybe they feel they don't need a CEO or haven't found the right people?

 

[Coathanger16]

Is it me or is it a coincidence that both BRS and BHX haven't recruited CEOs yet? Both have significant ownership stakes by OTPP. Maybe they feel they don't need a CEO or haven't found the right people?

Indeed. Both are wholly or partly owned by the same group. Both without CEO's. Both working on producing new master plans.

Aren't OTPP looking so sell their share in each of the airports? If so, could it be that there is a bidder looking to acquire both to start to create a competitor to MAG? Perhaps then there would only be need for one CEO for the "Group" with each airport then having their own "Managing Director".

Even if that's not the case, each airport would still need a CEO. The CEO is a very public figure that is often responsible for shaping the direction of things to come. It has often be the case that a new CEO has come in and the company has changed their focus to something else.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Does the masterplan for the next 20 years include the appointment of a new CEO?

Is it me or is it a coincidence that both BRS and BHX haven't recruited CEOs yet? Both have significant ownership stakes by OTPP. Maybe they feel they don't need a CEO or haven't found the right people?

Indeed. Both are wholly or partly owned by the same group. Both without CEO's. Both working on producing new master plans.

Aren't OTPP looking so sell their share in each of the airports? If so, could it be that there is a bidder looking to acquire both to start to create a competitor to MAG? Perhaps then there would only be need for one CEO for the "Group" with each airport then having their own "Managing Director".

Even if that's not the case, each airport would still need a CEO. The CEO is a very public figure that is often responsible for shaping the direction of things to come. It has often be the case that a new CEO has come in and the company has changed their focus to something else.

OTPP has already agreed to dispose of 30% of its shareholding to Australia's New South Wales Treasury Corporation (TCorp) and Sunsuper Superannuation Fund (Sunsuper) - 15% each to these two Australian investment bodies. So BRS will be partly owned by Australian funds again, something that occurred for several years earlier in this century through the Macquarie Group.

https://www.bristolairport.co.uk/ab...new-investment-partnership-at-bristol-airport

I believe that a new CEO will be in post sometime during the first quarter of next year although I have no idea who it is or when an announcement will be made.

In the days of Les Wilson there was no CEO - Les was the managing director under Bristol City Council ownership.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I spent an hour today at the Consultation drop-in at the Engine Shed at Temple Meads. I spoke to a number of people on the airport management including a long chat with the airport's Head of Aviation, who I hadn't met before. Everything that was said was 'on the record' as it was in a public environment although in truth not much of what we might describe as of 'real interest' to us was given away - unsurprisingly really as commercial sensitivities would be involved. I summarise some of the main points below:

+ The airport is open-minded about the three terminal options and they say they really do want as many responses from the public as possible.

+ There seems little doubt that the airport is looking at managed growth over the next few years and certainly won't add capacity just to improve numbers, which confirms what the previous CEO, Robert Sinclair, said in a magazine interview last spring.

+ I raised the runway issue and they really believe there is no need for an extension given the new aircraft types now in service and in the pipeline, although it was conceded that some are not as efficient off the BRS runway as was originally hoped. Airline A might be happy to use a specific type at BRS but Airline B might not because of that airline's minimum operating conditions including runway length.

+ It was accepted that airports such as BRS will always be mainly short haul airports as will most of the regional airports in the UK. There seemed no encouragement for the idea of imminent long haul routes to the likes of NYC or the ME.

+ The airport is aiming at capturing passengers who use London airports, mainly LHR, and short haul route passengers are a target.

+ The easyJet programme for summer 18 is not finalised. 'Monarch airports' are being topped up by other airlines including easyJet, although there was no suggestion that BRS will be cut back or not grown as quickly as it might otherwise have been by easyJet next summer. It's just taking that bit longer to put everything in place.

+ I asked about Jet2 and the reply was guarded although I was asked to consider what Jet2 could bring that existing airlines could not, particularly as Jet2 is morphing more and more into a holiday airline and TUI and TCX are continuing to expand at BRS. The airport would like more non-based routes to spread the load throughout the day, which is something that has often been mentioned on F4A in BRS threads.

+ In answer to another question I was told that no informal approach had been made to the local authority about raising the 10 mppa limit. I expressed some surprise at this given that 10 mppa is not that far away but apparently that's not the way things are done these days. Hmm!

+ The idea of APD devolution to Wales is naturally a concern but if it happens the airport will obviously have to live with such government action that would give CWL a commercial advantage over BRS (and possibly other airports). The claim often made by the WG, CWL and similar interests that long haul APD devolution to Wales would not hurt BRS's scheduled long haul routes because it hasn't got any ignores the considerable number of long haul passengers who use the hubs at AMS, DUB etc and who have to pay the long rate of APD. It would also make it more difficult for BRS to get any long haul scheduled routes in the future.

+ If Brexit is eventually settled in a 'soft' way there is a chance that Wizz would return to UK routes that it has recently abandoned. The margins on such services are tight and any slight diminution of loads can have a serious negative impact.

+ I was told that there might be an announcement next week with the hint that it involved a route or routes.

+ The new CEO is rumoured to have been identified but probably won't start until the spring, albeit the announcement is likely to be before that. This is in line with what I was told a week or so ago. In the absence of a CEO the airport company chairman*, Janis Kong, has temporarily adopted an executive chairman's role. She is far more in evidence at the airport than is normally the case. (* that is how she styles herself)

I am very grateful for the time given me today by the airport staff especially Peter Downes, Head of Aviation, who patiently answered my questions and responded to my comments, some of which went beyond the master plan consultation. He was very helpful but discreet at the same time. Although not a member of F4A he visits us regularly and soon twigged my user names both on here and on another aviation forum. So at least we know that our comments on BRS are being read by a senior member of the airport's management.

I know too that we have a number of members who work at BRS including another senior member of staff who is also an occasional poster.

 

[Jerry]

Sounds like you had a very informative chat with him and kudos to Bristol Airport for doing this consultation. Very enlightening post as well.

 

[Sierra3]

Sounds quite a long and meaty conversation, thanks for reporting it - interesting.

The bit about capturing pax from LHR strikes a chord, it would seem (at the very least) that BRS is planning to benefit from the lack of the 3rd LHR runway for at least 10 years. But IF the 3rd runway does go ahead then maybe the boot
will be on the other foot in the longer run.

 

[Marko1]

Very informative and interesting LY. As for the new route/s I can only assume it would be either easyJet or Ryanair. Neither of which have completed their summer schedules yet.

I'm not sure why they are cagey about jet 2 other than the perceived threat they could bring to existing carriers. I wonder whether jet 2 would like to come but brs is not encouraging them. They are the second largest U.K. Tour operator now so they really should have some representation here. Do they still have away bases in Alicante and Palma. That could be a start

As for the runway I wonder whether the feedback from airlines is that they are not close to being interested and without that interest is it worth going through the hassle of planning and costs.

Anyway very interesting times indeed. It's been quiet recently so it be nice to have some good route news soon

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Very informative and interesting LY. As for the new route/s I can only assume it would be either easyJet or Ryanair. Neither of which have completed their summer schedules yet.

I'm not sure why they are cagey about jet 2 other than the perceived threat they could bring to existing carriers. I wonder whether jet 2 would like to come but brs is not encouraging them. They are the second largest U.K. Tour operator now so they really should have some representation here. Do they still have away bases in Alicante and Palma. That could be a start

As for the runway I wonder whether the feedback from airlines is that they are not close to being interested and without that interest is it worth going through the hassle of planning and costs.

Anyway very interesting times indeed. It's been quiet recently so it be nice to have some good route news soon

I think there might be much in what you say, Marko. The ME is in the long grass at the moment with Qatar at CWL (my opinion, it wasn't expressed in those terms today at the consultation) and with airlines cutting back on US routes at bigger airports than BRS it's not a propitious time for such an airport to be realistically looking at, say, a NYC service, leaving aside any operational impediments.

 

[Jerry]

I'm not sure why they are cagey about jet 2 other than the perceived threat they could bring to existing carriers.

Maybe what has happened with Monarch after Jet2's arrival at BHX and STN has made them cautious, plus as well the other airlines may have already warned BRS privately about the effects of Jet2 have had on them at their other bases and BRS may not want to risk the current ones cutting back because of Jet2.

 

[Foxlimayankee]

Exactly that. It's not as if TUI or TCX aren't expanding. Both will have seen decent growth up to next summer, and probably more to come. New routes and higher frequencies are being offered, so the current routes are obviously doing well too. If Jet2 were to come in it would just create competition on current routes rather than new opportunities.
TCX and TUI work well along side EZY and FR. If you look at the whole route structure at BRS, each Airline plays it's own part and there's not an over capacity issue on routes. That must make BRS profitable for the Airlines, hence the incredible growth. Start stirring the pot with new competition and Airlines will become less interested in growth if they need to protect current routes.

 

[Jerry]

As well with TCX and TUI they also sell a lot of their holiday packages using Easyjets flights and support the Easyjet operation as well. Jet2 doesn't sell using other carriers so if they effected TCX and TUI they would also effect Easyjet which obviously are BRS's main customer airline wise.
What would be interesting would be Jet2's reaction and what they would do if BRS wasn't as inviting to them as they'd expect because if they are to essentially cover the whole country with their brand you'd have thought they would want to set up a base in this area.

 

[forest1979]

Good update...thanks LY

I still find it strange that they adopt the stance they do on the runway. Whichever way you position the argument, the facts are it is a limitation to either potential routes or airlines looking maybe at Bristol... this is a master plan for the next couple of decades.. in addition bristol is growing all the time along with the surrounding areas, so economically (and not knowing what it will be like in a post brexit UK) it is still a compelling business area that may very well be looking at expansion with interest from the wider world...
If LH is restricted to leisure then let’s hope TUI do base a 787 and we get a couple more routes soon..

Targeting short haul and the leakage to LHR, do we think it’s the case that BRS need to substantially increase its business, scheduled and or state airlines pressance at the airport? There are no UK lo cost (not including Flybe in this) so to speak at LHR so I can’t see what jet2 would offer to help with this... people are going to LHR I assume because of price or routes.. it would be great if they could get there hands on some data that shows SW as origin and flight from LHR to destination.. it might provide a better picture. Maybe they need to sweet talk BA to increase there offering?

Interesting times ahead.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Maybe what has happened with Monarch after Jet2's arrival at BHX and STN has made them cautious, plus as well the other airlines may have already warned BRS privately about the effects of Jet2 have had on them at their other bases and BRS may not want to risk the current ones cutting back because of Jet2.

Exactly that. It's not as if TUI or TCX aren't expanding. Both will have seen decent growth up to next summer, and probably more to come. New routes and higher frequencies are being offered, so the current routes are obviously doing well too. If Jet2 were to come in it would just create competition on current routes rather than new opportunities.
TCX and TUI work well along side EZY and FR. If you look at the whole route structure at BRS, each Airline plays it's own part and there's not an over capacity issue on routes. That must make BRS profitable for the Airlines, hence the incredible growth. Start stirring the pot with new competition and Airlines will become less interested in growth if they need to protect current routes.

I don't think that BRS has come late to this idea. Back in the spring the previous CEO, Robert Sinclair, said in a magazine article that the airport was not in the game of adding additional capacity for the sake of it. There had to be a demonstrable need and the airport's preference was to work with existing customer airlines to provide the growth and only add airlines when it makes sense. He said it worked well for the airport during the recession (BRS was affected less than most UK airports by the recession partly because of the type of catchment it serves but also because of the airport's policy). The Monarch situation might be a confirmation that the policy already in place is the right one - for BRS anyway. Robert Silk conceded it might not be right for all airports.

Where would Jet2 go if it wanted to come south west and for whatever reason BRS was ruled out? CWL would seem the obvious place but would a 4-aircraft base there not impact on TUI and TCX as it probably would at BRS? (a question for the CWL forum?).

Good update...thanks LY
I still find it strange that they adopt the stance they do on the runway. Whichever way you position the argument, the facts are it is a limitation to either potential routes or airlines looking maybe at Bristol... this is a master plan for the next couple of decades.. in addition bristol is growing all the time along with the surrounding areas, so economically (and not knowing what it will be like in a post brexit UK) it is still a compelling business area that may very well be looking at expansion with interest from the wider world...
If LH is restricted to leisure then let’s hope TUI do base a 787 and we get a couple more routes soon..

Targeting short haul and the leakage to LHR, do we think it’s the case that BRS need to substantially increase its business, scheduled and or state airlines pressance at the airport? There are no UK lo cost (not including Flybe in this) so to speak at LHR so I can’t see what jet2 would offer to help with this... people are going to LHR I assume because of price or routes.. it would be great if they could get there hands on some data that shows SW as origin and flight from LHR to destination.. it might provide a better picture. Maybe they need to sweet talk BA to increase there offering?

Interesting times ahead.

Something else that Peter Downes told me is that the airport is forever getting enquiries from regional business interests about increasing both the range and frequency of short haul business routes, hence the remark about capturing more short haul passengers from LHR. There seems more of a call for this than for long haul scheduled business routes.

The Bristol region is already one of the most economically successful in the country - it's the second wealthiest according to the previous prime minister, presumably based on GDP/GVA per capita and Bristol is the only English city outside London that produces more money for the Treasury than it receives, which is a continuing irksome sore for local tax payers. One of its strengths is digital technology - an industry that is most important for the future - and Bristol was listed second only to London in the UK Smart Cities Index. https://www.raconteur.net/technology/why-bristols-a-city-of-the-future

A lack of scheduled long haul hasn't prevented the Bristol region's extremely strong economic growth with no obvious signs of it slacking, with perhaps the only danger (Brexit aside) being a dearth of available grade A office space.

The city and its region's population is growing at a tremendous rate so there shouldn't be any lack of takers for air services in the future. However, Bristol is sometimes seen almost as a remote outer suburb of London, situated as it is at the western end of the M4 corridor, and there is no doubt that its long haul business travellers both inbound and outbound view LHR as the natural gateway.

Although I got the impression yesterday that a US scheduled route is not entirely discounted and would be welcomed if it arrived, the airport has other more realistic priorities, with grabbing as many LHR short haul passengers as it can being one of them. The airport might have to offer any scheduled carrier to the USA a substantial incentive which probably would not increase the airport's take against, say, extra short haul flights, and from the region's standpoint how much would a daily NYC help the economy anyway with so many choices just along the motorway? I'm not aware of any adverse economic reaction when the CO to EWR was axed in late 2010.

That's how I read the current airport thinking anyway.

Postscript

I was reading a local football message board just now - my other internet message board interest although I rarely post there these days - when for some unaccountable reason a conversation began about Filton Airport, as they put it. Inevitably BRS was dragged in and the comment was made that a place like Bristol should have a decent airport as the other main cities in the UK have. Apparently you can only fly on small planes at Lulsgate whereas all other major UK cities' airports have routes to destinations all around the world. I didn't know that. It shows how hard it is to please the average Bristolian when it comes to their local airport. A lot of them really do think that most of the other regional airports are like Heathrow in miniature.

 

[Jerry]

That is the problem for many regional airports, the perception for many is that the services they offer are inferior and many don't know what places you can actually fly to locally. Many people I speak to both online and in life generally are always surprised that I can fly to the US from Cardiff. I also see online a lot of people having unrealistic expectations of their local airport as well. In the end it's a lot of about the airport itself needing to generate more awareness generally about the routes you can actually fly to locally.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Returning to the subject of Jet2 and BRS's apparent reluctance to embrace them, I've looked at all the routes served by Jet2 from its nine UK bases and the only route not currently served from BRS is Thessalonika which TUI brought back a few years ago but then axed at the end of summer 2016.

In a sense then one can follow the BRS argument that Jet2 would bring nothing further to them that existing carriers could not provide with increased frequencies.

I didn't really ascertain how long the current policy of actively preferring existing carriers is likely to last. If BRS is intent on reaching 15 mppa or even more in the long term it's hard to see that it can be achieved without significant new airline presences.

Incidentally, I noticed in a CWL thread that StopBristolAirportExpansion are flexing their environmental muscles again saying in a tweet to Qatar Airways that they "are delighted that you made the right choice of airport in this region".

 

[Red Flyer]

Incidentally, I noticed in a CWL thread that StopBristolAirportExpansion are flexing their environmental muscles again saying in a tweet to Qatar Airways that they "are delighted that you made the right choice of airport in this region"
TLY
I think you will find the original SBAE closed down when they lost the fight against the expansion.
I don't think you're on Twitter because the new SBAE only follow CWL Spotters and its followers are all CWL Spotters as well. I find it hard to believe any anti-airport organisation whose main argument is pollution would support any airport. I also notice they are very pro BE! I could be wrong but I reckon it could be a member of another forum just trying to make mischief.