A new airport.... South Yorkshire Airport City?

Doncaster Sheffield Airport Strategic Review Announcement​

Forums4airports discusses the latest press release from Doncaster Sheffield airport where the airport questions the future of the airport. The owners of the airport, the Peel Group have announced they are looking at their options as the group has decided the airport is no longer viable as an operational airport. Here's the press release:

"The Board of Doncaster Sheffield Airport (DSA) has begun a review of strategic options for the Airport. This review follows lengthy deliberations by the Board of DSA which has reluctantly concluded that aviation activity on the site may no longer be commercially viable.

DSA’s owner, the Peel Group, as the Airport’s principal funder, has reviewed the conclusions of the Board of DSA and commissioned external independent advice in order to evaluate and test the conclusions drawn, which concurs with the Board’s initial findings.

Since the Peel Group acquired the Airport site in 1999 and converted it into an international commercial airport, which opened in 2005, significant amounts have been invested in the terminal, the airfield and its operations, both in relation to the original conversion and subsequently to improve the facilities and infrastructure on offer to create an award winning airport.

However, despite growth in passenger numbers, DSA has never achieved the critical mass required to become profitable and this fundamental issue of a shortfall in passenger numbers is exacerbated by the announcement on 10 June 2022 of the unilateral withdrawal of the Wizz Air based aircraft, leaving the Airport with only one base carrier, namely TUI.

This challenge has been increased by other changes in the aviation market, the well-publicised impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and increasingly important environmental considerations. It has therefore been concluded that aviation activity may no longer be the use for the site which delivers the maximum economic and environmental benefit to the region. Against this backdrop, DSA and the Peel Group, will initiate a consultation and engagement programme with stakeholders on the future of the site and how best to maximise and capitalise on future economic growth opportunities for Doncaster and the wider Sheffield City Region.

The wider Peel Group is already delivering significant development and business opportunities on its adjoining GatewayEast development including the recent deal for over 400,000 sq ft logistics and advanced manufacturing development on site, creating hundreds of new jobs and delivering further economic investment in the region.

Robert Hough, Chairman of Peel Airports Group, which includes Doncaster Sheffield Airport, said: “It is a critical time for aviation globally. Despite pandemic related travel restrictions slowly drawing to a close, we are still facing ongoing obstacles and dynamic long-term threats to the future of the aviation industry. The actions by Wizz to sacrifice its base at Doncaster to shore up its business opportunities at other bases in the South of England are a significant blow for the Airport.

Now is the right time to review how DSA can best create future growth opportunities for Doncaster and for South Yorkshire. The Peel Group remains committed to delivering economic growth, job opportunities and prosperity for Doncaster and the wider region.”

DSA and the Peel Group pride themselves on being forward-thinking whilst prioritising the welfare of staff and customers alike. As such, no further public comments will be made whilst they undertake this engagement period with all stakeholders.
During the Strategic Review, the Airport will operate as normal. Therefore passengers who are due to travel to the airport, please arrive and check in as normal. If there are any disruptions with your flight, you will be contacted by your airline in good time.
For all press enquiries, please contact Charlotte Leach at [email protected]."

"Not great news for DSA or the region"

Should the government or local council foot the bill and provide a financial subsidy to keep the airport open, thoughts...?

 

How can airline commit to an airport without an operator/confirmed opening date.. they cant. LH DSA? please, I think they would be back to LPL first or even try EMA. DSA? nope, KLM have never bothered either..

I can see the airport re-opening like promised to a slow/weekly flow of cargo traffic, with Pax introduced year after which still will be very minimal.. then what?

 

How can airline commit to an airport without an operator/confirmed opening date.. they cant. LH DSA? please, I think they would be back to LPL first or even try EMA. DSA? nope, KLM have never bothered either..

I can see the airport re-opening like promised to a slow/weekly flow of cargo traffic, with Pax introduced year after which still will be very minimal.. then what?

Depends on the sums. The Council have employed aviation specialist advisors who may or may not be using questionable modelling for growth projections (similar to what’s been done at MSE), and therefore their own understanding of what is possible may differ from any budding operator currently in the running. If the budding operator is to also be an investor then I think it’ll be more about how they would like to drive a reopened airport and the council may have to review their own expectations. If on the other hand it’s just to operate the airport on behalf of the council in return for the financial support required then they’ll be more likely to take some risks and play to the narrative to win the tender.

I personally think at the moment that they’ll have a hard time convincing any experienced operator to part with their own cash given the competitive disadvantage DSA currently has. Those in the running will be engaging with all sorts of aviation companies including airlines and freight operators to gauge demand, but there will never be a clear picture available until such a time that the airport is actually open for business and these same companies sign agreements and bring their business in. The factor of it not working before will play heavily into any decision making, as will the data available to these companies to see where things went wrong last time and whether anything has changed since.

Lots of work to be done, but it will be going on behind the scenes.

 

It will be interesting to see if this has any impact on the proposals for DSA and investor appetite especially on the low cost operator potential. There are certainly a number of strong headwinds currently impacting the industry at the moment….could well lead to at least a medium term delay in low cost ops establishing at a reopened DSA, potentially could be a far worse scenario…. https://www.ft.com/content/3b577503-6a35-4235-a6ea-4bb81209abb7

 

It will be interesting to see if this has any impact on the proposals for DSA and investor appetite especially on the low cost operator potential. There are certainly a number of strong headwinds currently impacting the industry at the moment….could well lead to at least a medium term delay in low cost ops establishing at a reopened DSA, potentially could be a far worse scenario…. https://www.ft.com/content/3b577503-6a35-4235-a6ea-4bb81209abb7

It certainly is not going to help??? These things seem to go around in cycles but in the shorter term it would seem the risk would be heightened. As has been discussed previously it's all likely to be about balancing risk/cost in the short to mid term against the view of longer term potential. At the moment the logic points in one direction - but credit to CDC - they have defied logic by getting the project so far - but is it going to be a wise use of public money? Only time will tell.

 

Yes there seems to be a growing industry consensus that airlines will in the short term perhaps need to consolidate on what they have already got which could seriously impact on the possibility of new routes - and that is far from just DSA specific.

I would suggest any reopened DSA's best hope remains a return of TUI as they were the most successful operator previously.

Definitely interesting times ahead, not only for the industry as a whole but especially for DSA.

 

See the deluded lot on one of the DSA Facebook pages are talking about DSA becoming the 'Manchester' of the north airport including the building of a second runway to cope with all the traffic they believe will happen once the airport reopens. These folk live on cloud 9, they will struggle to hit 2m passengers by 2030 never mind the 20m Manchester currently pass through the airport. As genuine enthusiasts we all hope a reopened airport succeeds, though this is doubtful, but for some to believe it can rival MAN borders on fantasy.

 

See the deluded lot on one of the DSA Facebook pages are talking about DSA becoming the 'Manchester' of the north airport including the building of a second runway to cope with all the traffic they believe will happen once the airport reopens. These folk live on cloud 9, they will struggle to hit 2m passengers by 2030 never mind the 20m Manchester currently pass through the airport. As genuine enthusiasts we all hope a reopened airport succeeds, though this is doubtful, but for some to believe it can rival MAN borders on fantasy.

Just a small correction, for the sake of accuracy, to say that Manchester are currently on a touch under 29.5m for the rolling year.

 

See the deluded lot on one of the DSA Facebook pages are talking about DSA becoming the 'Manchester' of the north airport including the building of a second runway to cope with all the traffic they believe will happen once the airport reopens. These folk live on cloud 9, they will struggle to hit 2m passengers by 2030 never mind the 20m Manchester currently pass through the airport. As genuine enthusiasts we all hope a reopened airport succeeds, though this is doubtful, but for some to believe it can rival MAN borders on fantasy.

I thought Manchester was in the North?

Anyway, they’re being led by 20 year old rumours of Virgin wanting to open a hub at DSA and ship all the passengers up from London by train. Only reason this didn’t happen? Peel apparently charged too much.

There is just no debating that logic, it’s so engrained. I wonder if/when the airport does reopen, and none of these things that appear to be expected actually materialise, who will be to blame then?

 

The way the industry is going they will be lucky to compete with HUY never mind MAN..! I highly doubt EMA/LBA are shivering in their boots.

 

In other news it looks like Ros Jones has been on a jolly to Farnborough in support of Hybrid Air Vehicles and their airships that are apparently to be built somewhere in the Doncaster area. Meanwhile she has taken the time to meet with the DfT to discuss the case to re-establish DSA airspace.

Reading between the lines on this, and after @radar provided a decent background to the CAA review from a few years ago finding that DSA should not have been given such a large area of airspace, perhaps the council are aware of this and hence attempting to influence the DfT execs. The DfT are unlikely to be able to influence the CAA, it goes against the fundamental principles of what the CAA is there for! Perhaps these budding ‘operator/investors’ are questioning this too.

 

The way the industry is going they will be lucky to compete with HUY never mind MAN..! I highly doubt EMA/LBA are shivering in their boots.

Oddly enough, at the last LBA Consultative Committee, the Chairman, who is well versed in the aviation industry and a thoroughly knowledgeable chap, stated that at best, a reopened DSA would offer similar competition to LBA as HUY does today, which is virtually nothing at all.

 

Oddly enough, at the last LBA Consultative Committee, the Chairman, who is well versed in the aviation industry and a thoroughly knowledgeable chap, stated that at best, a reopened DSA would offer similar competition to LBA as HUY does today, which is virtually nothing at all.

I wonder, given the insistence of the Council that the airport operator must target the likes of KLM, that with Eastern now operating those flights on behalf of KLM for an as yet to be determined period (perhaps long term?), whether that has made the likelihood of a switch over to a reopened DSA and even more remote possibility? After all, their HQ and engineering support is at HUY where I understand they pay nothing to park the aircraft when not in use.

Vast majority of users of HUY-AMS have O&D in the Humber region, the rest Lincolnshire and a small percentage from South Yorks and West Yorks. Sadly it’s still not picked up to pre Covid levels of useage but hopefully those high fare paying customers are still using it keeping it viable. Any operator no matter who it is will still struggle to sell that idea to an airline like KLM I’m sorry to say, particularly when data is in the industry (and is available to anyone who wants it for a fee!). Peel alluded to the issue after their strategic review, but over 1 million people leave South Yorkshire to use MAN every year, the challenge was and always will be how to convince airlines to try to stop that leakage, but also to encourage people in the more populated areas of South Yorkshire to choose to use DSA in the face of more choice and flexibility at MAN.

 

Breaking news - apparently the grass has been cut.

 

Breaking news - apparently the grass has been cut.

Is that to check that the runway is still there?

 

I thought Manchester was in the North?

Anyway, they’re being led by 20 year old rumours of Virgin wanting to open a hub at DSA and ship all the passengers up from London by train. Only reason this didn’t happen? Peel apparently charged too much.

There is just no debating that logic, it’s so engrained. I wonder if/when the airport does reopen, and none of these things that appear to be expected actually materialise, who will be to blame then?

Suspect two things have now put paid to any of that thinking, firstly it seems the gov are now keen to support the third runway at LHR as a way of accelerating growth in the U.K. Secondly when HS2 does finally reopen BHX will be just 37 minutes from central London. A point they are currently touting to potential LH operators.

I wonder, given the insistence of the Council that the airport operator must target the likes of KLM, that with Eastern now operating those flights on behalf of KLM for an as yet to be determined period (perhaps long term?), whether that has made the likelihood of a switch over to a reopened DSA and even more remote possibility? After all, their HQ and engineering support is at HUY where I understand they pay nothing to park the aircraft when not in use.

Vast majority of users of HUY-AMS have O&D in the Humber region, the rest Lincolnshire and a small percentage from South Yorks and West Yorks. Sadly it’s still not picked up to pre Covid levels of useage but hopefully those high fare paying customers are still using it keeping it viable. Any operator no matter who it is will still struggle to sell that idea to an airline like KLM I’m sorry to say, particularly when data is in the industry (and is available to anyone who wants it for a fee!). Peel alluded to the issue after their strategic review, but over 1 million people leave South Yorkshire to use MAN every year, the challenge was and always will be how to convince airlines to try to stop that leakage, but also to encourage people in the more populated areas of South Yorkshire to choose to use DSA in the face of more choice and flexibility

 

Is that to check that the runway is still there?

Well, some people claiming to know it all would say it’s compliance. If the airfield was to be imminently in use then it is compliance… Wildlife management etc etc.. Airlines are keen to avoid those pesky birds flying through the engines and causing the flight deck to suddenly fancy a KFC.. Costs quite a bit too when that happens.

However, I think more likely a spruce up for some important visitors. The Council will still be on the sell. Of course they also want to give people something to talk about, which is why it’s obviously breaking news - cos there’s not a lot else to talk about except for when Fraport take it over and turn it into a carbon copy of (insert successful German or Greek airport here) airport and Lufthansa open their much needed U.K. cargo arm.

Suspect two things have now put paid to any of that thinking, firstly it seems the gov are now keen to support the third runway at LHR as a way of accelerating growth in the U.K. Secondly when HS2 does finally reopen BHX will be just 37 minutes from central London. A point they are currently touting to potential LH operators.

That was always a Labour thing. But so was DSA! So I wouldn’t rule out support from Central Government. Would make a good new town development though for some of those million or so new houses they plan to build…

 

Some key aspects of the initial operation of DSA.

 

View attachment 31029

Some key aspects of the initial operation of DSA.

Brilliant, tell the CAA you don’t need controlled airspace whilst asking for controlled airspace.

Who is advising these people!?? Do they not realise that there are some vocal stakeholders who will now have seen this letter and will be making a show of it to the CAA? They have just made a rod for their own back, the GA community will be jumping down their necks with this one. Also as the CAA have already intimated that they should not and now would not grant Class D to DSA (least not to the extent it had) had they applied now, unless the Government actually circumvent the procedures which goes against the whole ethos of the CAA, then you’ve got a solid challenge against the reinstatement of the airspace. I’m part of a group who, it looks likely, might be challenging it. You do not need Class D for ‘GA/business’.

One more thing. The letter mentions Tower and Approach control, doesn’t mention radar control. Are they saying they’ll once again be subcontracting this work out to a remote radar unit like they did under Peel? If they have no radar control at all then the CAA are unlikely to grant them CAS.

 

Brilliant, tell the CAA you don’t need controlled airspace whilst asking for controlled airspace.

Who is advising these people!?? Do they not realise that there are some vocal stakeholders who will now have seen this letter and will be making a show of it to the CAA? They have just made a rod for their own back, the GA community will be jumping down their necks with this one. Also as the CAA have already intimated that they should not and now would not grant Class D to DSA (least not to the extent it had) had they applied now, unless the Government actually circumvent the procedures which goes against the whole ethos of the CAA, then you’ve got a solid challenge against the reinstatement of the airspace. I’m part of a group who, it looks likely, might be challenging it. You do not need Class D for ‘GA/business’.

One more thing. The letter mentions Tower and Approach control, doesn’t mention radar control. Are they saying they’ll once again be subcontracting this work out to a remote radar unit like they did under Peel? If they have no radar control at all then the CAA are unlikely to grant them CAS.

They really are showing themselves up to be a set of Why on earth are they referencing unmanned and electric aircraft - I presume this was to placate Milliband before he would put his signature to the letter!

 

They really are showing themselves up to be a set of Why on earth are they referencing unmanned and electric aircraft - I presume this was to placate Milliband before he would put his signature to the letter!

A couple of the MPs are new and probably do not have an idea yet as to what goes on. Unlikely that the Aviation Minister (a former Primary School teacher!) will endeavour to impose his superior knowledge of air safety ( ) upon the CAA. It's down to the new operator to negotiate with the CAA informing them of who the airlines are that 'desire' to operate together with the anticipated frequency of IFR movements in order for them to take a decision as to exactly what is required in respect of controlled airspace. (Wonder why this information was not included in the letter in order to give the Minister something to work on??? ) As seemed clear from the expert summary from 'radar' the CAA are likely 'on' this. There has to be a balance here - as a previous 'high frequency' user of controlled airspace I see there is a need for protection but on the other hand now as a 'VFR' user, it was obvious that the footprint and volume of the previous DSA airspace was totally excessive and needless for such a piddling number of IFR movements and impacted very negatively on other airspace users and airfields miles away from DSA. To my mind it's unlikely it will re-appear in its previous format regardless of this sort of stuff and petitions signed by Beryl from Bawtry who can't be *rsed to travel 30 minutes longer to EMA or MAN.