Leeds Bradford - General Thread

[ChrisBBB]

I think you are beyond reproach, but there are many more forum members than you.

As others have said, some of us live far afield, have kids, jobs, families, help out at kids clubs etc…
Supporting from a distance is one thing, being able to, or even wanting to travel and give up time and money to attend are two different things

We all care and are passionate about the airport (otherwise we wouldn’t be here), but we shouldn’t be criticising those who cannot give as much as others

That said - hats off to you and others who will be attending, it doesn’t go unnoticed or unappreciated

 

[SierraHotel]

The next Airport Consultative Committee meeting is this Thursday. Looking forward to WHs superb report.

 

[White Heather]

The next Airport Consultative Committee meeting is this Thursday. Looking forward to WHs superb report.

It's actually on Wednesday, the 19th. For some reason, this one is being done on line via Teams, which I really dislike. I'm actually at my car dealers that afternoon as it's first service is being done, so I'm intending to sit in a quiet corner and join the meeting from there - providing the technology works, which it often doesn't when I'm involved! I have the dubious ability to ensure anything remotely techy fails spectacularly.

 

[GolfFox]

Perhaps, but as I have already pointed out, these events are information only events as the airport reaches out to the local community. It's not about gathering support or about any planning application. It's also unlikely that anything will be said that hasn't already been reported by myself after attending the Consultative Meetings.

From a purely personal point of view therefore, I will not be attending the Cookridge event just to hear what I already know. Those there who are anti airport will, no doubt, have their say, but as a 70 year old woman I am really not interested in being a lone voice in a room full of naysayers, especially when it will have zero impact.

As for putting in the effort in support of LBA, I think that having attended and participated in the late 1980s Public Inquiry (24 hours), raised over 17,000 declarations of support in 1993 for 24H ops (which directly led to a further Public Inquiry being avoided), and attended Airport Consultative Committee Meetings for the past 35 years (reporting back on this forum since 2009), I have done my bit. So I feel no guilt at not attending. I know that if I do, my annoyance at the NIMBYs will do my blood pressure no good at all. It's bad enough having to listen to and respond (when permitted) to the negativity from various Councillors and representatives at the Committee Meetings without doing it again in the presence of they who shall not be named.

Even so, I agree that it is perhaps a surprise that only 3 have declared their intention to attend, and all at Benton Park. That doesnt mean though they are not supportive of LBA, nor should they be criticised if they choose not to go.

I do not live in the area anymore although having spent many happy years based at LBA

 

[Seasider]

By far the best way to support LBA is by using it!

 

[BCFC]

By far the best way to support LBA is by using it!

In the past 15 years I have only used MAN for MCO and HKG direct, I fly about 4 times a year wouldn't dream of using another airport…I’m lucky in the fact we only go to Portugal and LBA serves FAO well.…other than the lounges it's a great airport.

 

[Len Fish]

To be frank I don’t think our attending will make the slightest bit of difference. LBA are quite aware of the support of this group as are the opposition who no doubt hate us. The nay sayers of LBA expansion and night flying will never be convinced otherwise (heads and brick walks spring to mind) and the real decisions that matter are made in the corridors of power both locally and nationally. We already have a great insight into future developments and obstacles to be overcome by WH being at the Airport Consultative Committee Meetngs. That’s not to say that those who want to attend shouldn’t, of course they should, but I don’t see it as urgent or a matter of life or death if we don’t.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

To be frank I don’t think our attending will make the slightest bit of difference. LBA are quite aware of the support of this group as are the opposition who no doubt hate us. The nay sayers of LBA expansion and night flying will never be convinced otherwise (heads and brick walks spring to mind) and the real decisions that matter are made in the corridors of power both locally and nationally. We already have a great insight into future developments and obstacles to be overcome by WH being at the Airport Consultative Committee Meetngs. That’s not to say that those who want to attend shouldn’t, of course they should, but I don’t see it as urgent or a matter of life or death if we don’t.

I see it as an opportunity to help the airport by providing support in the meeting.

I know we are all passionate about the airport but thats not enough. The group who are against the airport have shown that tangible support is what is needed. They are well organised and get themselves 'out there'.

 

[michael]

Just thinking about this mornings Heathrow situation. If my memory serves me right from previous posts and discussions a good while ago am I right in thinking LBA currently has no equipment to deal with wide bodied aircraft? If this is the case would it not make sense for some equipment to be kept - if only for diverts? I get that these situations are very rare, and if all our own night stopping aircraft are in then a diverted wide body would be the last thing required but looking at the list of LHR diverts before a lot of the transatlantic traffic started heading back to their origin airports there are diverts to not only LGW, MAN, GLA, SNN, and BHX but also to such exotic places as Barcelona, Madrid, Frankfurt, and Paris. I'm not suggesting for one minute that LBA could have handled all those diverts , or that suddenly a BA A380 is going to arrive, but, for example, RwandAir WB710 went to Paris - was an A332, Japan Airlines JL41 went to Helsinki, - was a B788, and Air India AI161 went to Frankfurt - was a A359. All of these aircraft can - allegedly - operate happily in and out of LBA. I'm guessing the likes of Air India may already have a regular operation out of Frankfurt - hence the divert choice?
Yes, I know at LBA there's then the issue of handling agents, onward coaches, not to mention a big lump of metal to then eventually depart, but at least the poor passengers would then be in the correct destination country. I suppose the awkward bit is then any transiting passengers, and the airlines will no doubt say they are looking after their passengers at the chosen divert airport but surely arrangements could have been made for these?

 

[KARFA]

would be quite expensive to keep and maintain the equipment, maintain training for staff (there would be no day to day experience), maintain the necessary category of fire coverage, keep stands set aside, keep fuel reserves etc. etc. all for the sake of one day in 1/2 years. it isn't like you would get remotely close to recouping any of those costs either.

 

[Cookridge resident]

Just thinking about this mornings Heathrow situation. If my memory serves me right from previous posts and discussions a good while ago am I right in thinking LBA currently has no equipment to deal with wide bodied aircraft? If this is the case would it not make sense for some equipment to be kept - if only for diverts? I get that these situations are very rare, and if all our own night stopping aircraft are in then a diverted wide body would be the last thing required but looking at the list of LHR diverts before a lot of the transatlantic traffic started heading back to their origin airports there are diverts to not only LGW, MAN, GLA, SNN, and BHX but also to such exotic places as Barcelona, Madrid, Frankfurt, and Paris. I'm not suggesting for one minute that LBA could have handled all those diverts , or that suddenly a BA A380 is going to arrive, but, for example, RwandAir WB710 went to Paris - was an A332, Japan Airlines JL41 went to Helsinki, - was a B788, and Air India AI161 went to Frankfurt - was a A359. All of these aircraft can - allegedly - operate happily in and out of LBA. I'm guessing the likes of Air India may already have a regular operation out of Frankfurt - hence the divert choice?
Yes, I know at LBA there's then the issue of handling agents, onward coaches, not to mention a big lump of metal to then eventually depart, but at least the poor passengers would then be in the correct destination country. I suppose the awkward bit is then any transiting passengers, and the airlines will no doubt say they are looking after their passengers at the chosen divert airport but surely arrangements could have been made for these?

What would they do with the freight?

 

[pug]

Just thinking about this mornings Heathrow situation. If my memory serves me right from previous posts and discussions a good while ago am I right in thinking LBA currently has no equipment to deal with wide bodied aircraft? If this is the case would it not make sense for some equipment to be kept - if only for diverts? I get that these situations are very rare, and if all our own night stopping aircraft are in then a diverted wide body would be the last thing required but looking at the list of LHR diverts before a lot of the transatlantic traffic started heading back to their origin airports there are diverts to not only LGW, MAN, GLA, SNN, and BHX but also to such exotic places as Barcelona, Madrid, Frankfurt, and Paris. I'm not suggesting for one minute that LBA could have handled all those diverts , or that suddenly a BA A380 is going to arrive, but, for example, RwandAir WB710 went to Paris - was an A332, Japan Airlines JL41 went to Helsinki, - was a B788, and Air India AI161 went to Frankfurt - was a A359. All of these aircraft can - allegedly - operate happily in and out of LBA. I'm guessing the likes of Air India may already have a regular operation out of Frankfurt - hence the divert choice?
Yes, I know at LBA there's then the issue of handling agents, onward coaches, not to mention a big lump of metal to then eventually depart, but at least the poor passengers would then be in the correct destination country. I suppose the awkward bit is then any transiting passengers, and the airlines will no doubt say they are looking after their passengers at the chosen divert airport but surely arrangements could have been made for these?

Posted something similar on the DSA thread. The reason airlines are diverting to other countries or just turning around is because the airports they are going to will be airports these airlines already operate into and as such have the necessary infrastructure, staffing and accommodation contracts. Putting aircraft in non network airports is far from an ideal situation operationally, you tend to have crew all over the place going out of hours, no or very little ground handling agreements in place, the massive task of getting passengers to their destination etc.

Just to bring it back to DSA as an example, when it was open and LBA was closed due weather or something Jet2 would divert to one of their current bases and bus the passengers back that way, they’d even divert to EMA and the passengers and crew would have to pass DSA to get back to base! It minimises network disruption as they will have crew there on standby who can position the aircraft back. Sadly the passenger convenience goes out of the window, because if they put that high on the agenda it would have a negative knock on impact on further schedules for days afterwards (meaning even more passengers face disruption) and it’s not an ideal situation to be in.

Unless there is some significant event which closes all airports in the U.K. apart from a few like LBA, then LBA is unlikely to be on the cards for diversions.

 

[Sputnik1]

Just thinking about this mornings Heathrow situation. If my memory serves me right from previous posts and discussions a good while ago am I right in thinking LBA currently has no equipment to deal with wide bodied aircraft? If this is the case would it not make sense for some equipment to be kept - if only for diverts? I get that these situations are very rare, and if all our own night stopping aircraft are in then a diverted wide body would be the last thing required but looking at the list of LHR diverts before a lot of the transatlantic traffic started heading back to their origin airports there are diverts to not only LGW, MAN, GLA, SNN, and BHX but also to such exotic places as Barcelona, Madrid, Frankfurt, and Paris. I'm not suggesting for one minute that LBA could have handled all those diverts , or that suddenly a BA A380 is going to arrive, but, for example, RwandAir WB710 went to Paris - was an A332, Japan Airlines JL41 went to Helsinki, - was a B788, and Air India AI161 went to Frankfurt - was a A359. All of these aircraft can - allegedly - operate happily in and out of LBA. I'm guessing the likes of Air India may already have a regular operation out of Frankfurt - hence the divert choice?
Yes, I know at LBA there's then the issue of handling agents, onward coaches, not to mention a big lump of metal to then eventually depart, but at least the poor passengers would then be in the correct destination country. I suppose the awkward bit is then any transiting passengers, and the airlines will no doubt say they are looking after their passengers at the chosen divert airport but surely arrangements could have been made for these?

There is a mothballed ULD loader stored near the fuel farm that would be needed for widebodies. Can't imagine it works as it hasn't been touched in yonks, and there's certainly nobody trained or current on it.

 

[lbaspotter]

There is a mothballed ULD loader stored near the fuel farm that would be needed for widebodies. Can't imagine it works as it hasn't been touched in yonks, and there's certainly nobody trained or current on it.

The high-loader was fully refurbished & serviced by LBA during the covid pandemic. I understand that ground handling companiy Sissport still refuse to operate it due to it previous unreliability.

I am also lead to believe an (unnamed) airline put a handling request in a few years back operate a wide-bodied aircraft on an ad-hoc charter basis, but it was refused. Wither or not that is true I’m not certain.

 

[Aviador]

I don't believe it would be such a big deal. One could probably be loaned from somewhere if needed.

 

[lbaspotter]

I don't believe it would be such a big deal. One could probably be loaned from somewhere if needed.

True, but forget diverts.

And a tow-bar may need to be loaned depending on type.
When the last A330 visited operated by Balkan Holidays they had to bring in their own with them. Took an age getting it out of the hold.

 

[gulftraveller]

There is little point in planning for an event like this. How many diverts did UK airports take ? Roughly it was LGW 7, MAN 6?, BHX 1 CWL 1, GLA 4, NCL 1. However inaccurate those figures are, it shows how few aircraft diverted in, even where there is plenty of capacity.

 

[EX9]

LBA can just about park all the Jet2 aircraft on a night. They have also changed Taxiway Alpha to be a code C taxiway having moved stands back and implementing a rear of stand road.

Code letter	Wingspan	Typical aeroplane
A	< 15 m	PIPER PA-31/CESSNA 404 Titan
B	15 m but < 24 m	BOMBARDIER Regional Jet CRJ-200/DE HAVILLAND CANADA DHC-6
C	24 m but < 36 m	BOEING 737-700/AIRBUS A-320/EMBRAER ERJ 190-100
D	36 m but < 52 m	B767 Series/AIRBUS A-310
E	52 m but < 65 m	B777 Series/B787 Series/A330 Family
F	65 m but < 80 m	BOEING 747-8/AIRBUS A-380-800

ICAO Aerodrome Reference Code | SKYbrary Aviation Safety

Definition The ICAO Aerodrome Reference Code is a two part categorisation of aircraft types which simplifies the process of establishing whether a particular aircraft is able to use a particular aerodrome. It is included in ICAO Annex 14. It has two 'elements', the first is a numeric code based...

skybrary.aero

 

[Aviador]

Went to this evenings meeting at Benton Park school. It was very informative and it was nice to speak to Vincent Hodder and his team directly. It was also nice speaking to @LBAYORKIE, please to meet you again. I also invited someone new to the forum who was attending the meeting, hopefully he will join and participate here.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Went to this evenings meeting at Benton Park school. It was very informative and it was nice to speak to Vincent Hodder and his team directly. It was also nice speaking to @LBAYORKIE, please to meet you again. I also invited someone new to the forum who was attending the meeting, hopefully he will join and participate here.

It was an excellent meeting, the facts presented were very interesting and Vince Hodder did an excellent job of presenting them. As far as I can tell only Aviador and I attended from the forum, which was pretty poor. However if we can get 2 people to every meeting I think that would be an acceptable outcome.