Leeds Bradford - General Thread

[White Heather]

Hi wawkrk

Thanks - I appreciate what you said above. Effectively yes - the Council did absolutely nothing with regard to transport infrastructure during their ownership of the airport, and as little as they could get away with regarding the terminal development. They undertook piecemeal extensions which resulted in terminal designed to cope with 1960's passenger numbers having bits stuck on here and there, but never really focussed on the future, even when Jet2 arrived and passenger numbers started to increase rapidly. In fact, all they did was bail out when it became obvious that a lot of money was going to be needed to cope with the predicted increase in passenger numbers.

Having done that, and having attracted a record sale price for a regional airport, they have then held a gun to the head of Bridgepoint and forced them to undertake various traffic schemes in the vicinity of the airport in addition to working up a transport infrastructure plan, all as part of the planning process, and unless the airport complied with the requirement, they would not have been allowed to progress the terminal. As a result, although the outline approval was given a couple of years back, in reality, approval was only given last year when the airport had managed to deal with all the council 'baggage' that came with that consent. It is no wonder therefore that it has taken longer than we would all have liked, and Bridgepoint have had to expend money on these schemes which they probably didn't bargain for when they bought the airport. So effectively, Bridgepoint were only in a position to start really throwing money at the terminal development and the serious planning around a year ago, just as the aviation industry was hitting rock bottom, along with everything out there connected with the investment industry (which Bridgepoint are part of). It would therefore have been financial suicide to commit to the terminal at that time, even if they could obtain the funding to do so. Chances are they have had to wait until matters improved in both the aviation industry and finance industry before they can take this forward.

In my view therefore, Bridgepoint have found themselves delayed in the first place by a council intent on making them do what the council should have done years ago, and that delay resulted in it simply being the 'wrong time' to commit to the terminal. I have absolutely no information about the terminal and when it will start, but I still remain confident it will do. In any case, work has to start within 3 years of consent being given as far as I am aware otherwise it is back to square one.

Oh, finally, hello back radar. Nice to have you on the forum!!

 

[Seasider]

I hope that we can accept that this being a "discussion forum", then each participating member can accept the other members point of view. Otherwise we may as well close the forum down, and I for one, definitely do not want that to happen.
I will relate my experience of using the airport, this coming weekend, when I return at the end of next week.

 

[oldendays]

ATC: Does anybody know what's going on with the Air Traffic radios at the moment ? This last week I've seen a few vehicles and personnel at the receiver site and personnel on the roof of the tower removing and installing antennas. It looks like a forest up there now compared to this time last year ! I know there have been one or two frequency changes and a delivery frequency introduced but I thought the work for these changes had been carried out a while ago.

Also, has anyone else noticed the relatively weak reception on 125.575 MHz ? Since the change from 123.75 and the replacement of the transmission antenna I've definitely noticed a deterioration in transmission quality, particularly during wet and/or windy weather. Possibly something to do with the old ground plane antenna being replaced with a different type ??

 

[Moo2009]

Hi there a little information, I am a student at the aviation Acadamy at Lba, we had a talk from john parkin today, he seems a very smart guy not giving much away. A few things he did mention from questions asked to him were that the terminal is running 18 months behind this is due to planning issues but building work will start next year buy remodeling the existing terminal ready for construction on the extension, he also mentioned a covered walkway or pier all way down to stand17 due to lots of complaints about buses and complaints from airlines over passengers getting wet. Also he said they were talking to a major airline about a link to Dubai and also talking to an airline about the heathrow link, he seemed very positive about the heathrow link. When I asked him about ryanair expansion he said m o Leary is hosting a lunch in December. Also there will not be a parrelel taxiway he said not good value for money

 

[Bigman]

FANTASY FRIDAY

As it’s Children in Need day, I thought I would have a bit of fun. So here’s my fantasy take on a few things.

Peel decide to flog DSA off as it is a dead loss. They get a good deal from Tesco and a property developer.

They use the funds to buy LBA from a struggling Bridgepoint, who accept a loss just to get some brass in their pockets.

Peel bring Thomsons and Wizzair to LBA with them. Thomsons start a programme of long haul charters with their new 787’s.

A new large hangar and paint shop then get built on the South side. The rest of the land over there gets flattened to make more parking space.

The work starts on the terminal extension... I get to do Kylie Minogue over the bench up Cemetery Road while watching an A380 take off to Singapore....LUFC win the FA Cup and England get a good football team.

OK...last paragraph maybe too far fetched!!!!

 

[stewief1]

Interesting post from Jonathan. Sounds like John Parkin was indeed, playing his cards very close to his chest! However, it did get me thinking about the LHR route. I wonder who LBA are in talking to regarding the LHR link - considering BA and Bmi hold the majority of the slots and certainly have the largest regional flights into LHR, could it be either of them two? I personally can't see BMi reinstating the route, nor can i see BA establishing a new one (although i would love that to be the case). Any other suggestions? Apologies if this is off topic. :smile:

 

[lbaspotter]

Well if LBA is to get its LHR route reinstated surly its either one of the 2 following Airlines. bmi british midland or British Airways.

A 3 times daily service with an Airbus A319 operation would work as long as they offer mid-haul and long-haul connections at good times.

 

[White Heather]

Hi there a little information, I am a student at the aviation Acadamy at Lba, we had a talk from john parkin today, he seems a very smart guy not giving much away. A few things he did mention from questions asked to him were that the terminal is running 18 months behind this is due to planning issues but building work will start next year buy remodeling the existing terminal ready for construction on the extension, he also mentioned a covered walkway or pier all way down to stand17 due to lots of complaints about buses and complaints from airlines over passengers getting wet. Also he said they were talking to a major airline about a link to Dubai and also talking to an airline about the heathrow link, he seemed very positive about the heathrow link. When I asked him about ryanair expansion he said m o Leary is hosting a lunch in December. Also there will not be a parrelel taxiway he said not good value for money

Thanks for this information Jonathan. The news regarding the terminal is as I would expect and indeed I have been trying to explain not long ago on another thread that planning issues would have held up the project. It appears from what John said that internal reconfiguration works will be required to some degree ahead of the main building works commencing, which is logical for a project of this type.

The news regarding the covered walkway is good news indeed. Not only customers have been complaining - it is something that has been raised at virtually every consultative meeting over the past couple of years. It appears they may be going to back down and provide one, which is much needed. Even so, it will not resolve the poor service provided by the buses and it is a very long walk all the way down to stand 17!

Otherwise it sounds as though he is being as secretive as I would expect. There is, for example, no way he would give away anything about Ryanair's intentions, particularly when it is likely that Mr O'Leary will make some sort of announcement shortly.

Good post though Jonathan and thanks for the information

 

[Moo2009]

just looked at my notes from the meeting with JP, a few more points, the covered walkway would be stage 3 of the terminal development. he also said new LBA web site will be launched very shortly it was in final stages of testing, also the airport had signed contracts with a number of retailers for the new terminal- he did not name any but he did say that bridgepoint own pret a manger. he said they had alocated land for rail station and he had been at a meeting with local transport cheifs that morning.

 

[WYIA]

All sounds very good and the walkway is fantastic!! At last!! Yes it is a long walk down to Stand 17 but under cover i am sure passengers will be more than happy. It beats getting on a grotty bus, getting squished up due to stuipd over-crowding and hey compare it to LHR or AMS when you may be walking 20 minutes alone just to get to your gate! So I dont see it as an issue.

 

[Seasider]

Thanks for the laugh, Bigman.

 

[ravmanlba]

The work starts on the terminal extension... I get to do Kylie Minogue over the bench up Cemetery Road while watching an A380 take off to Singapore....LUFC win the FA Cup and England get a good football team.

Nice one bigman, made me chuckle that.

 

[jason1-11]

My source within BA can't come up with anything, so there is a good chance you can disregard them. Personally, I don't think you'll see the route re-instated at all in the short to medium term. Too much money to be made on long haul unfortunately.

 

[whoshotjimmi]

Hi all, long time reader, first time poster.

I have read everyone's comments with great interest and, as a long time advocate of LBA, I thought I may as weel make my own views on the subject known.

Firstly, on the subject of the loss of LHR and the apparent demise of BMI regional, I have to say that I was a big fan of the airline. My flights to Paris on the ERJ's were the best I have ever experienced and not that expensive (at the time, a darn sight cheaper than the JET2 alternative) and I mourned the loss of LHR as I travel to West London resonably often at the last minute and the flights were very often the best and cheapest option (not wanting to drive). Although FlyBe have brought in LGW, I do not see it as a viable alternative, though I appreciate that it has been reasonably successful.

Secondly, on the potential routes issue, looking at the data for all UK airports for last year according to Wikipedia (ok, not the most reliable source, but good information nonetheless), there is significant demand for Dubai. My feeling is that LBA could make a daily Dubai work given the right marketing and improvements, however, the potential would be greatly limited by the length of the runway, as it would be with any Long Haul arrangement using larger aircraft. People have mentioned Dubai as a holiday destination but it would also serve as an alternative to Amsterdam for flights to the Far East and Australia. The other main problem would be the current service at Manchester. Surely such a flight at LBA would impact numbers over the pennines and, really, there is only one airline that would be interested in such a route and that is Emirates. They would not be happy with lowering numbers at Manchester, surely? As afr as other routes go, I would have thought that we are looking mainly at a connection with Lufthansa to Frankfurt and further Ryanair and FlyBE expansion mainly to Poland and perhaps parts of Scandinavia and Madrid. My opinion is that NYC probably isn't on the cards though without a connection to LHR, perhaps a 757 3 times a week may be sustainable. Again though, the main problem is the decent number of flights to the US from Manchester. Flights to NYC from LBA would only really work if they provided a significant advantage over travelling to MAN. In this case, it would probably be wise (at the moment at least) to concentrate in areas that will not have massive competition from the neighbours. When reasonable development has been made to the infrastructure at LBA, it may be more feasible to compete a little.

Which brings me nicely onto my third topic - and one that has provided much debate on this thread.

We can say whatever we like about the council not developing the surrounding area during their time in charge but the fact is that they are now not the owners and the current owners wish to develop the terminal building. It is painfully obvious to most people that LBA's main disadvantage is it's location. It always has been and thus always will be. A shiny new terminal would certainly deal with the current issues of overcrowding and slow passage through security etc (my previous 3 or 4 times through the airport have highlighted just how badly overcrowded it is becoming - most recently a morning departure to Pisa in September; the departure lounge was bursting) but it will not deal with the issue of it's location. The road links from Bradford and the West are very poor. From the North, East and South, they are ok until they reach the A65, which is a bottleneck without the airport. So from my point ofview, the council are absolutely correct to enfore infrastructure improvements but, not only that, it is entirely essential if the airport wishes to attract more passengers. Merely rebuilding the terminal will not be enough in the medium to long term. According to a previous post, an area of land has been set aside for a railway station. Whilst this is positive, I would suggest that it is not a real statement of intent and more a provision for possible expansion in the future. Whilst a station would open up Sheffield as a catchment area, I do not think it feasible at present. Someone else mentioned a bus between Guiseley and Horsforth. Whilst the principle of connecting LBA with the 2 stations is very good, one must look at it logically - a bus to guiseley already exists and by the time you have got a train to Horsforth or Guiseley from Harrogate, Bradford or Leeds and then a bus to LBA, you may as well havegot on a bus at one of the aforementioned points.

IMO, the improvements that should be made (other than the local traffic considerations) are increasing the speed of buses into Leeds and Bradford and looking at signage from the major routes around the area tothe airport which are currently farcical. The route from the M62 west disappears completely in the centre of Bradford. The ideal routes from the South and East should take people from the M62 onto the ring road by the White Rose Centre and follow it to the A65. From the North and North East from the M1 at Colton and the A64 at Seacroft onto the ring road, leaving it at Lawnswood and going through Bramhope before arriving at the airport fromthe North. The more cars that can be directed away from the A65 the better IMO.

As I have learned from my working career, you have to make sure that the little things are right before you can make the big score. At LBA, the terminal building is the big score and the little things are holding it back.

 

[White Heather]

The issue of signage to the airport is one I have raised time and again at the consultative meetings, with some success - for example the airport signs on the A1 directing traffic from the North to turn on to the A59 near Knaresborough, was a sign put up following the lack of signage being raised. However, the problem is that the responsibility for airport signage rests not with the airport, but with the local authority. It was North Yorkshire Council that funded the sign on the A1 and on towards the airport, but not all councils are so willing to help. I have been trying to get signage from the Skipton/Clitheroe/Settle direction and from the Aire Valley for a long time, but they are obviously unwilling to bother. I can assure everyone that the matter has been raised by the airport on a lot of occasions, but they are not able to just go and put signs up. I can never understand the reluctance to co-operate though - all it takes is one 'For Leeds Bradford Airport follow (aeroplane symbol)' sign and then an aeroplane symbol applied to other signs, which can't be so expensive.

Personally, I think there should be a rule that states that all A class roads have airport signs when they are within a certain distance of the airport itself - eg 10 miles, and Motorways within 20 miles. Then it would not be an issue to argue over - they would have to do it.

 

[whoshotjimmi]

I think it is the responsibility of the airport to ensure good signage to and from it. They should take a leading role in the procurement of signage and also undertake a reasonable amount of research to ensure the best routes are chosen. Of course, this all costs money, but it can only help the airport going forward. As has been mentioned, if you are not local or knowledgable about the local road network, it can be difficult to find. This must be putting off some potential new customers to the airport. Bradford becomes a maze with no obvious exit. Routes through Leeds are a little better, though I still believe separating traffic and omitting the A65 as much as possible is desirable. I also don't think Sat Nav can be fully relied upon to find the best route.

I would like to make a small apology too. Having re-read my first post, I come across as overtly negative. I am not negative at all. I think the recent sucess of LBA, as well as its apparent ability to attract airlines and routes at a time when many other airports are losing numbers and various airlines are having issues is absolutely terrific. I think that, above all else, it shows that the airport has the correct people in place to take the airport forward and, coupled with development plans, it is all very promising. I want to see continued success, not only for my own benefit, but for the good of the region. I believe tourism is a great untapped resource and, though tourist numbers are on the rise, the airport could be a big part of attracting future inbound visitors. And, for the record, my thoughts on route development reflect my realistic thinking on the issue. I think longer haul destinations are a real possibility from LBA but everything else has to be in place first, including a more balanced economy. It is also obvious that there will be many routes that LBA will just not be able to compete with Manchester on, whether we like it or not. I am certain however that everything LBA appear to be doing at the moment will lead to an enhanced route network and increased passenger numbers in the future.

Just out of interest, how much does the airport liaise with tourist boards and websites both here and abroad to encourage inbound passengers to visit the region and to use LBA as the inbound airport of choice? I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly think the Yorkshire region has at least as much if not more to offer than the obvious tourist hotspots such as London and Cornwall.

 

[White Heather]

I am fairly sure that the airport liases closely with the Yorkshire Tourist people (can't remember their proper name), particularly over plans for flights from the US etc. However, the airlines themselves liase too - Jet2 in particular has done so to promote Yorkshire to potential inbound tourists from Europe.

Whilst I agree with you entirely about signage and the need for it, the fact is that it is the council or highways agency who put the signage in place. Cities don't pay to have their names put on the signs, so there is an argument that airports shouldn't have to do so either. In view of the current success of the airport, it would seem that most people do find it, and I would think the vast majority will have little difficulty doing so provided they can either use a map or sat nav. True, the roads and signage in Bradford are rubbish, but apart from the Bradfordians themselves, few would need to approach the airport from that direction and most of those know where the airport is, and it is probably just as easy for the Huddersfield/Halifax folk to continue down the M62/M621 to Leeds and then use the A6120 Leeds Ring Road to Horsforth and the airport.

The current signage already directs passengers approaching Leeds from the South to use the M1/M62/West Ring Road and A65 from Horsforth, whilst from the East it directs them via the M1/East Ring Road/A660 Otley Road/A658 to the airport, so they are doing exactly as you suggest to avoid the City Centre and A65 as far as possible. Signs from the A1 for traffic from the North are good, and this also picks up traffic from the York area using the A59. In my view it is traffic from the West and North West where the problem lies, particularly since drivers are told to use the M606 via Bradford rather than continue down to the Leeds Ring Road. More needs to be done, but you can be sure that Bridgepoint are not about to start paying for road signs any time soon when it is down to others to meet those costs. Since in most cases, all that is needed is an initial sign and then a stick on aeroplane for other signs, you would think it cannot be so expensive, yet even when signage is replaced in the normal course of events and due to damage, they still seem to replace like for like rather than take the opportunity to add the airport signs on the new ones, which is plain daft to me.

 

[Runway 32]

Thought I would add to the BA topic! Found out today that a few representatives from BA are in Leeds on Friday 3rd December. Not sure whether or not they will be at the airport but could this be the signs of things to come or just a coincidence? Anyone else heard anything special happening that day?

 

[White Heather]

I would imagine it is co-incidence. I would be amazed if BA (or anyone else) operated from LBA to LHR. The airport MD has stated several times that the only hope of getting the route up and running again is if and when a 3rd runway was built at LHR, which courtesy of the Conservative government, is not going to happen. The recent comment that the airport is looking at this again therefore is something of a surprise to say the least.

I still find it rediculous though that BA and BMi both compete on the route from MAN, leaving LBA with nothing when there is surely still a demand. When I flew from MAN to LHR in May (and back again on return from Canada) the flights were about one third full, operating on an A320 down to LHR and an A321 on the way back. If that was a typical load for mid morning on a Thursday, they must be losing money hand over fist on the route and you would think they would make more of a profit operating from LBA using the same equipment.

 

[News Guru]

[textarea]MP calls for police probe on cash deal

A TYNESIDE politician today called for a police probe into a major airport refinancing deal which could land the region in huge debt.

Newcastle East MP Nick Brown spoke out after details emerged of how three senior public officials allowed two airport bosses to be paid sky-high bonuses for simply taking out a loan.

John Parkin and Lard Friis, former executive directors of Newcastle International Airport Ltd (NIAL), which is partly-owned by the region’s seven councils, pocketed £8.5m between them after brokering a seven-year £377m mortgage with the Royal Bank of Scotland in 2006.

But the pair ensured it was written into their contracts that they received a percentage of the loan amount as a bonus.

Former chief executive Mr Parkin received 2% of the mortgage and former finance director Mr Friis received 1%.

The decision to allow the bonuses was decided by a remuneration committee of five people – three of which were leading North East public figures. The airport company is now suing Eversheds, the legal firm which drafted the contract.

Fears are growing it will be left to the region’s seven local authorities, known as LA7, to clear much of the airport debt, believed to be around £325m, before it refinances again in 2013.

Mr Brown said: “I don’t understand how the committee can allow the two directors to take a percentage of what they borrowed considering public money is involved.

“I will be calling for the evidence to be passed over to the police because there could be potential for serious misconduct in the public office.”

Mr Parkin, now chief executive of Leeds Bradford Airport, was suspended in March 2007 after details emerged of the controversial package paid to him and the now-deceased Mr Friis.

NIAL then launched legal action against the pair but an out-of-court settlement was reached at the 11th hour in October 2008 and all parties entered a confidentiality agreement.

The Tyne & Wear district councils, Newcastle, Sunderland, Gateshead, North Tyneside and South Tyneside, and the county councils of Northumberland and Durham, own 51% of the airport’s shares. The rest are owned by Copenhagen Airports.

A spokesman for LA7 said: “In agreeing the contracts of airport executives, the remuneration committee - made up of representatives from the LA7 authorities and Copenhagen Airports – relied heavily on external professional advice.

“When the scale of the bonus payments became known, it was apparent that the remuneration committee had been poorly advised. The LA7 authorities, through the airport board, acted swiftly and robustly in the interests of taxpayers to initiate legal action which led to proceedings to halt the payments and recover the money through the High Court.”

A spokesman for Eversheds said: “We have acted properly and in accordance with instructions received from the company in all matters pertaining to our work for NIAL.” Mr Parkin did not wish to comment.

Read More Source[/textarea]