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...?

 

What on Earth...?

Reform government would try to acquire Doncaster Sheffield Airport land with CPO

This appears to mark a change in policy for Reform UK, as in Barnsley Nigel Farage told reporters he wanted a “private sector solution” for DSA.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

Tice has just blown it.

A 'spanner' in the works for votes??

 

A 'spanner' in the works for votes??

Apart from the internal incoherence of Reform's policy, the mayor's opponents are causing massive cognitive dissonance with this, "we support reopening DSA, but..." nonsense. They might oppose that crackpot lease, but ultimately they're accepting Jones's premise that Doncaster needs an airport, that it virtually guarantees an economic miracle, and that the only question is how it's paid for. It's lunacy! They're on about spending a few hundred million pounds on a completely superfluous airport in a saturated local market. It's nothing more than an incinerator for taxpayer's money.

 

Apart from the internal incoherence of Reform's policy, the mayor's opponents are causing massive cognitive dissonance with this, "we support reopening DSA, but..." nonsense. They might oppose that crackpot lease, but ultimately they're accepting Jones's premise that Doncaster needs an airport, that it virtually guarantees an economic miracle, and that the only question is how it's paid for. It's lunacy! They're on about spending a few hundred million pounds on a completely superfluous airport in a saturated local market. It's nothing more than an incinerator for taxpayer's money.

Let them, if they can find the private sector investor willing to take the risk then let them crack on. No issue with that, I doubt they’ll find anyone particularly in this period of uncertainty but you can’t say fairer than that if someone wants to take it on. It should not and must not be the tax payer though, certainly not the Doncaster tax payer alone who takes all the risk. Doesn’t matter what Chadwick says, the information he is putting out there is false. As Gainshare hasn’t been approved, and as it appears to be in a deadlock, the money is secured by the council and by nature of that the council tax paying public of Doncaster. Some may think it’s a price worth paying, but if the council end up having to cut services. Or worse end up bankrupt, you’d see support for it turn into strong opposition pretty swiftly.

 

Let them, if they can find the private sector investor willing to take the risk then let them crack on. No issue with that, I doubt they’ll find anyone particularly in this period of uncertainty but you can’t say fairer than that if someone wants to take it on. It should not and must not be the tax payer though, certainly not the Doncaster tax payer alone who takes all the risk. Doesn’t matter what Chadwick says, the information he is putting out there is false. As Gainshare hasn’t been approved, and as it appears to be in a deadlock, the money is secured by the council and by nature of that the council tax paying public of Doncaster. Some may think it’s a price worth paying, but if the council end up having to cut services. Or worse end up bankrupt, you’d see support for it turn into strong opposition pretty swiftly.

Yes, but unless I'm putting 2 and 2 together and making 5, Tice's plan appears to be to use public funds to forcibly take the site from Peel via a CPO. In order to found an airport that is still totally surplus to requirements. It's a bit like Jones's plan only even slower, even more expensive, even more unrealistic, and even more inane. All it does is take Jones's mad lease agreement out of the equation and raise the highly theoretical possibility that the site could be sold to a private buyer. (Let's pause to reflect on the fact that it is already privately owned!)

I suspect he just held forth without thinking it through, but the "optical" problem is they're accepting the mayor's premise that the airport is unquestionably essential when it very clearly isn't. As has already been demonstrated.

 

Yes, but unless I'm putting 2 and 2 together and making 5, Tice's plan appears to be to use public funds to forcibly take the site from Peel via a CPO. In order to found an airport that is still totally surplus to requirements. It's a bit like Jones's plan only even slower, even more expensive, even more unrealistic, and even more inane. All it does is take Jones's mad lease agreement out of the equation and raise the highly theoretical possibility that the site could be sold to a private buyer. (Let's pause to reflect on the fact that it is already privately owned!)

I suspect he just held forth without thinking it through, but the "optical" problem is they're accepting the mayor's premise that the airport is unquestionably essential when it very clearly isn't. As has already been demonstrated.

I’d suggest let him believe that’s possible we don’t know how peel would react if there was a credible offer to purchase the site using CPO as the bargaining chip. We do know Peel are open to selling so long as it’s a price they feel respects the investment they already made into the site. Teesside is an example of this. A CPO is probably null and void in the current situation because of the active lease, but if Regurge think they can get private investors to the table with Peel then let them knock themselves out.

One things for sure, the situation cannot and must not be allowed to continue in its current form because it will topple again.

 

I’d suggest let him believe that’s possible we don’t know how peel would react if there was a credible offer to purchase the site using CPO as the bargaining chip. We do know Peel are open to selling so long as it’s a price they feel respects the investment they already made into the site. Teesside is an example of this. A CPO is probably null and void in the current situation because of the active lease, but if Regurge think they can get private investors to the table with Peel then let them knock themselves out.

One things for sure, the situation cannot and must not be allowed to continue in its current form because it will topple again.

Well, yes. Everything's for sale for enough money!

The trouble is at the moment that all official opposition to this madness accepts the premise that reopening the airport is an excellent idea or even essential. In fact, it's financial suicide for anyone mad enough to touch it!

As far as I can tell though, Richard Tice's bizarre intervention aside, the vote on the 11th looks almost certain to go in favour of recission. So I suppose the question is, what happens on the 12th...

 

Well, yes. Everything's for sale for enough money!

The trouble is at the moment that all official opposition to this madness accepts the premise that reopening the airport is an excellent idea or even essential. In fact, it's financial suicide for anyone mad enough to touch it!

As far as I can tell though, Richard Tice's bizarre intervention aside, the vote on the 11th looks almost certain to go in favour of recission. So I suppose the question is, what happens on the 12th...

I wouldn’t be too sure. Jason Charity had Chadwick and the reopening project bang to rights, he has commented that he’s seen the business plan and stated that he could tell within a couple of pages that it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Quite clearly the problem is that the private sector aren’t interested, the council therefore need to be investor of last resort. The private sector will have looked at it, completed their own due diligence and decided that because it failed to gain traction before in spite of heavy private subsidies it’s not a viable investment. But we’ve covered this previously accepting you’re a new member - welcome by the way!

Regarding the rescission, it’s far from a done deal. If they can maintain those 28 signatories then yes highly likely, but how much sway will these recent PR stunts have had? We know the Cabal are trying to there everything at it to make it too big to fail. What happens the next day is that they’ll carry on until they run out of money is my guess. Reform will not say it’s unviable because that would be politically unpopular.

 

how much sway will these recent PR stunts have had?

Hopefully none, given their brazen and desperate nature.

Can they really carry on without a funding stream? Besides, the £57m they're arguing over isn't a huge amount of money in the context of what they're trying to do. They can't go through all this every time they want to blow a measly fifty million quid!

 

Hopefully none, given their brazen and desperate nature.

Can they really carry on without a funding stream? Besides, the £57m they're arguing over isn't a huge amount of money in the context of what they're trying to do. They can't go through all this every time they want to blow a measly fifty million quid!

I’m not sure, but I suspect there’ll be some contingency plan. Pulling the £57million would certainly provide at least a headache, I suspect their orders for equipment are contingent on securing this money along side their plans to ramp up recruitment to 200 people by the end of the year. As has been mentioned previously they do also appear to have another £30 million to play with.

Meanwhile looks like the rally took place today. If the photo in the below article is representative then turnout wasn’t exactly strong.

Rally held at Doncaster Sheffield Airport to support re-opening

A rally has been held to support the re-opening of Doncaster Sheffield Airport

www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk

 

Meanwhile looks like the rally took place today. If the photo in the below article is representative then turnout wasn’t exactly strong.

Rally held at Doncaster Sheffield Airport to support re-opening

A rally has been held to support the re-opening of Doncaster Sheffield Airport

www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk

That's hilarious!

If there really is no mechanism to stop this craziness then there's something badly wrong with the system.

Doncaster Sheffield Airport could be 'massive drain' on taxpayers - Farage

Reform UK wants to reverse a £57m council loan to reopen Doncaster Sheffield Airport.

www.bbc.co.uk

At it again. "We want to save this airport but [...]"

Why? It'll be a massive drain on taxpayers because it isn't commercially viable. Or anywhere near it. Acquiring the freehold won't magically generate passenger demand, won't conjure up willing airlines out of thin air, and it certainly won't fix the fundamental geographical problem of being boxed in by Manchester, East Midlands, and Leeds Bradford!

Right up until 2022, Peel owned the freehold, and it remains in private sector hands. They owned the runway, the terminal, the car parks, the lot. And they shut it. Because it was losing money hand over fist, and obviously wasn't going to stop losing money. Because there is no demand. Now the situation is even worse because nearby airports have eaten DSA's lunch - they've hoovered up what business there was.

I don't understand why simply changing ownership of the freehold magically makes the airport viable. Can someone explain this to me? It was run by the freehold owner for years and got precisely nowhere, and under far more favourable conditions than now.

 

That's hilarious!

If there really is no mechanism to stop this craziness then there's something badly wrong with the system.

Doncaster Sheffield Airport could be 'massive drain' on taxpayers - Farage

Reform UK wants to reverse a £57m council loan to reopen Doncaster Sheffield Airport.

www.bbc.co.uk

At it again. "We want to save this airport but [...]"

Why? It'll be a massive drain on taxpayers because it isn't commercially viable. Or anywhere near it. Acquiring the freehold won't magically generate passenger demand, won't conjure up willing airlines out of thin air, and it certainly won't fix the fundamental geographical problem of being boxed in by Manchester, East Midlands, and Leeds Bradford!

Right up until 2022, Peel owned the freehold, and it remains in private sector hands. They owned the runway, the terminal, the car parks, the lot. And they shut it. Because it was losing money hand over fist, and obviously wasn't going to stop losing money. Because there is no demand. Now the situation is even worse because nearby airports have eaten DSA's lunch - they've hoovered up what business there was.

I don't understand why simply changing ownership of the freehold magically makes the airport viable. Can someone explain this to me? It was run by the freehold owner for years and got precisely nowhere, and under far more favourable conditions than now.

A question were all eagerly awaiting answers to. The conspiracy theory is Peel designed it to never be a success and/or priced airlines out so they could get the road links in place and close it to build houses or warehouses on it. Conveniently for people who subscribe to such belief (which includes sons former workers who really should know better) the details of the agreements they had with airlines were and still are not freely available to the public. So you get people who think the published fees are the charges the airlines with contracts paid. This is so far wide of the mark it’s frustrating at times that you can’t provide the evidence that proves this is nonsense.

So we are to assume that if peel charged too much (often times nothing, or even subsidising airlines) then the council are somehow going to afford to pay airlines to fly from there, in some cases at higher rates than the Peel subsidies. LBA have threatened legal action on this basis. Of course easyjet or a.n. Other big name could move ops there and generate a wider market, but they didn’t do this previously and so why they’d decide it’s a good idea now beats me. I suspect mr foster is naive to the pleasantries extended by airline execs.

 

That's hilarious!

If there really is no mechanism to stop this craziness then there's something badly wrong with the system.

Doncaster Sheffield Airport could be 'massive drain' on taxpayers - Farage

Reform UK wants to reverse a £57m council loan to reopen Doncaster Sheffield Airport.

www.bbc.co.uk

At it again. "We want to save this airport but [...]"

Why? It'll be a massive drain on taxpayers because it isn't commercially viable. Or anywhere near it. Acquiring the freehold won't magically generate passenger demand, won't conjure up willing airlines out of thin air, and it certainly won't fix the fundamental geographical problem of being boxed in by Manchester, East Midlands, and Leeds Bradford!

Right up until 2022, Peel owned the freehold, and it remains in private sector hands. They owned the runway, the terminal, the car parks, the lot. And they shut it. Because it was losing money hand over fist, and obviously wasn't going to stop losing money. Because there is no demand. Now the situation is even worse because nearby airports have eaten DSA's lunch - they've hoovered up what business there was.

I don't understand why simply changing ownership of the freehold magically makes the airport viable. Can someone explain this to me? It was run by the freehold owner for years and got precisely nowhere, and under far more favourable conditions than now.

You are saying what I have said so many times, AND what people I know in the industry are saying.

Perhaps we are both forgetting that Peel invested their many millions but really, they wanted it to fail all along, and charged extortionate fees to put off the many airlines clamouring to fly from DSA to worldwide destinations? Or so the mayor and her mechanic tell us.

Or maybe we should have more regard to the super long runway. It's the longest runway in the north, don't you know, points the right way, and never, ever, has bad weather, unlike Leeds which is of course the airport that apparently caused DSA to fail first time so public enemy no 1. Not MAN, despite that being the airport that negatively impacts all airports in the north, attracting airlines like wasps to a jamjar.

Then, of course, there's the forthcoming train station on the East Coast Main Line which will have passengers flocking to DSA like holidaymakers to Scarborough in the 50s, disregarding the airport near home.

And finally, lest we forget, it was, and will be again a lovely airport, with no queues. Nice and quiet. Lots of empty seats to sit on. Lots of empty stands for the aeroplanes. Oh wait!........

Not an ounce of truth or common sense in any of these arguments. The fact is that DSA failed because it is, as stated, surrounded by established and growing airports, located close to their larger catchment areas and as was proven, the DSA catchment area is insufficient to fill aircraft consistently. Various airlines gave it a go, assisted by significsnt subsidies. All but two failed and left. Of those two, one is changing its operating model to use more third party carriers and the other is cutting back in the UK generally other than at Luton, but are now established at LBA and LPL albeit with dimimished programmes. Many of their foreign farm worker passengers who attracted them to DSA in the first place are now gone, courtesy of B****t.

If CDC have genuinely been advised by aviation consultants that DSA2 has a great future, they need to be fired. Certainly York Aviation, the premier consultancy, don't think so, but of course we are told that's because they are 'in bed' with LBA.

The entire thing is reckless political shenanigans. However, it's good to see a whole 50 or so turning up today to demand their airport reopen. If only they knew......

 

Just 45 people turned up now they plan on picketing in Doncaster after the vote

 

Just 45 people turned up now they plan on picketing in Doncaster after the vote

Perhaps 20 of them are the GALBA folk protesting about LBA who seem to favour DSA instead. Easily identifiable by the teddy bears they carry around.

 

You are saying what I have said so many times, AND what people I know in the industry are saying.

Perhaps we are both forgetting that Peel invested their many millions but really, they wanted it to fail all along, and charged extortionate fees to put off the many airlines clamouring to fly from DSA to worldwide destinations? Or so the mayor and her mechanic tell us.

Or maybe we should have more regard to the super long runway. It's the longest runway in the north, don't you know, points the right way, and never, ever, has bad weather, unlike Leeds which is of course the airport that apparently caused DSA to fail first time so public enemy no 1. Not MAN, despite that being the airport that negatively impacts all airports in the north, attracting airlines like wasps to a jamjar.

Then, of course, there's the forthcoming train station on the East Coast Main Line which will have passengers flocking to DSA like holidaymakers to Scarborough in the 50s, disregarding the airport near home.

And finally, lest we forget, it was, and will be again a lovely airport, with no queues. Nice and quiet. Lots of empty seats to sit on. Lots of empty stands for the aeroplanes. Oh wait!........

Not an ounce of truth or common sense in any of these arguments. The fact is that DSA failed because it is, as stated, surrounded by established and growing airports, located close to their larger catchment areas and as was proven, the DSA catchment area is insufficient to fill aircraft consistently. Various airlines gave it a go, assisted by significsnt subsidies. All but two failed and left. Of those two, one is changing its operating model to use more third party carriers and the other is cutting back in the UK generally other than at Luton, but are now established at LBA and LPL albeit with dimimished programmes. Many of their foreign farm worker passengers who attracted them to DSA in the first place are now gone, courtesy of B****t.

If CDC have genuinely been advised by aviation consultants that DSA2 has a great future, they need to be fired. Certainly York Aviation, the premier consultancy, don't think so, but of course we are told that's because they are 'in bed' with LBA.

The entire thing is reckless political shenanigans. However, it's good to see a whole 50 or so turning up today to demand their airport reopen. If only they knew......

Obviously I don't know this for a fact but I'm sure everyone involved knows perfectly well DSA2 is already dead. It's just a gravy train isn't it. The people receiving the money want to carry on receiving the money for as long as possible. Although something's afoot isn't it - that business with Damian Allen threatening Jason Charity is fishy as...

 

That letter was posted in the local newspaper

Has had Labour panicking

Open Letter to Doncaster Labour
To: Labour Party Doncaster

Date: 24 April 2026

I’ve read the letter that you have chosen to distribute through a member of the public, and while I understand the passion behind the campaign, we need to have a serious conversation about the viability. Calling the decision to pause and reassess reckless is a strong take, but what’s actually reckless is ignoring the massive financial shifts that have happened since that 2024 business case was written.

When the loan was first discussed, we were looking at an optimal case of 1.9 million passengers. Even in that best-case scenario, the numbers were grim. We were looking at an EBITDA loss of £81 million, which realistically hits £130 million once you factor in tax and interest. That is a staggering amount of public money to lose even when things are going perfectly.

Now, the reality has changed. The forecast has dropped to 1.1 million passengers. If the project was bleeding £81 million at nearly two million passengers, the deficit at 1.1 million is going to be a total disaster. Proceeding anyway isn’t leadership, it’s choosing to walk off a cliff edge because you already took the first step.

The avoidable risk here isn't the delay. The real risk is the long-term insolvency of this project. If this plan is as solid as you say it is, why is there such a struggle to get private investors to take on the primary risk? Private capital doesn't just want a safety net, they want a viable airport. If they aren't biting, it’s because they see what we see: a project that, in its current form, will likely become a permanent drain on Doncaster’s budget.

We have to think about the people who aren’t at the airport. Every million pounds used to plug a hole in a failing business model is a million pounds taken away from social care, fixing our roads, and basic council services.

True stability means making decisions based on the data in front of us today, not sticking to an outdated plan from two years ago just to save face. We want the airport open, but we won't bankrupt the council’s future to do it. We need a deal that works for the taxpayers, not just a headline that looks good for a month.

The information available to councillors today is worlds away from the skewed version presented back in November. For that, you can thank your leader, Mayor Ros Jones. By withholding the full picture, she has created this mess and is directly culpable for the position we are in now. If she can't be transparent about the risks, perhaps she should make way for the Reform UK Doncaster leader so this project can actually be rescued.

Doncaster deserves an airport that can actually fly on its own two feet.

The conversation to be had is not between a member of the public to local party leaders, it is for Oliver Coppard to speak with the National Party leader of Reform UK Nigel Farage who has made his party's intentions clear.

 

Apart from the standard cognitive dissonance (the airport clearly isn't viable but we should reopen it anyway) that's a good letter.

I think if local people knew what they were being put on the hook for they'd be absolutely furious.

 

Apart from the standard cognitive dissonance (the airport clearly isn't viable but we should reopen it anyway) that's a good letter.

I think if local people knew what they were being put on the hook for they'd be absolutely furious.

They’ll never directly admit it’s not viable, it’s not politically popular to do so. However what they are clearly saying is that if the private sector won’t invest then it’s not viable. I think Chadwick is seeing the writing on the wall too, as even if it did move on to a different operating model and by some chance it does get a private sector investor he’d be sidelined straight off the bat. It appears more to be about his own ambition for it than the truth of it. This is obviously problematic.