Pakistan International Airlines

[White Heather]

We used to have the 767 charters by Thomson to Bridgetown Local Yokel, but along with several other airports, they were axed at the beginning of the economic downturn. I do know however that the 787 is the aircraft that LBA management are looking to in the future to provide any long haul routes out of LBA - and presumably the A350 too? They remain adamant also that the 777 200 can operate without any problems from LBA. I can't see any sign of a 787 at LBA in the near future though unless we secure new routes to the likes of Florida. As for PIA (getting back on the subject matter), I am certain that LBA management will be doing their damnest to find an operator to fill the gap left by PIA and if anyone can do it, it will be Tony Hallwood. He got PIA there in the first place (when most would have laughed at the prospect) and he got British Airways there when everybody thought we had absolutely not a chance in hell. Keep the faith! We may have to keep it a while, but you never know!

 

[Bob101]

I have long felt that once Qatar start to get more of their 787s we might see something from them. The withdrawal of PIA might actually provide a bit more encouragement for an airline of their ilk to step in with there being a clear market for long haul destinations to the east.

 

[lbaspotter]

Well it looks like the local press have finally clicked on to the news regarding PIA pull-out.

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... _Bradford/

 

[SNOWMAN]

hi all
RUMOUR ONLY
P.I.A. to go daily with a 777 ex man.

sm1 lums:

 

[lbaspotter]

Only winner out of this is Manchester yet again, Bloody typical!

 

[Aviation Academy]

Good afternoon

Could you explain further what you mean by this. Do you mean a new 777 daily flight at lbia, or something else?

 

[kevinbev]

Well planned out was this wasnt it. To hope that someone jumps into the gap pretty quick. Dont want to bleat on about the runway again but hasnt Luton had 777`s in doing Tel Aviv in the past, about same length as LBA. Newcastle`s runway is not much bigger than LBA and they see Emirates 777`s every day. So LBA management have said that they are capable of handling it so why didnt PIA at least give it a go. Getting to the stage where we have to accept that unless any runway extension and apron expansion goes ahead then we will just be a municipal airport serving no more than European destinations.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I agree that the runway should be long enough, but if airlines don't fancy it (it is a little tight) then they just won't try it. What the airport have to understand is that they have to provide the facilities that the airlines require- including a longer runway. If it's necessary to persuade an ariline that the runway's long enough it probably already too late to change their minds. In the past I have tried to arrange freight charters of large aircraft into LBA, but none of them are interested- often citing the L1011 incident, so they have been arranged through MAN or DSA. Airlines are used to long runways so that's what they expect to be presented with.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I should add that the 787 could be part of the answer but it's really not maximising the airports options.

 

[Moo2009]

How much extra concrete do we need then at LBA

 

[Moo2009]

Just to add to the last comment, if PIA did want to operate into LBA with the T7 they should come out and state this but saying they cannot risk it due to the short runway. Am pretty sure LBA would have a few long haul routes operating now if the concrete was long enough, you just have to look at the population around this area. I understand jet2 are looking at Florida etc but not from LBA
Come on bridgepoint spend the cash and make the airport a little Goldmine

 

[Aviador]

It's not the actual length of runway it's the distance available for landing which is considerably shorter than the physical length of the runway at Leeds.

The total runway physical length at LBA is 2250m

Runway 14 has 1802m LDA
Runway 32 has 1916m LDA.

In comparison, the runway length at NCL is 2329m. The landing distance available at Newcastle is:

Runway 25 has 2125m LDA
Runway 07 has 2209m LDA

The LDA available at Newcastle is less than the total length of runway at LBA.

 

[Aviador]

How much extra concrete do we need then at LBA

300m is the magic figure but Bridgepoint says LBA doesn't need to increase the landing distance. This is a perfect reason to counter that theory.

 

[whoshotjimmi]

Is there more to this than meets the eye?

T&A article mentioned the problems some PIA crew have had at LBA. Perhaps there is room for a conspiracy theory....

 

[White Heather]

My view on this is that this is nothing at all to do with the runway at LBA or the 777. It is a cost cutting measure, pure and simple, by an airline that is struggling in many ways, especially financially. They operate into LBA but tend to move crews to and from MAN, which increases their operating costs. They do carry good loads but they will do the same from MAN on a 777, and I would strongly suspect that operating from MAN will, overall, reduce their operating costs without negatively impacting on loads, especially since they now don't have Air Blue to compete with. This is what happens when one airline has it all to themselves.

A further reason which to me proves this is nothing to do with the runway is that PIA also withdrew from GLA last year I believe?

The fact is, like it or not, the presence of MAN is always going to impact on LBA when it comes to long haul. This is not an example of why the runway should be extended (and I for one would love it to be) - it is an example of why Bridgepoint will not spend many millions of pounds extending it, because they know that the additional long haul flights they would attract will be insufficient to justify the expenditure, particularly with new technology aircraft around the corner that should be capable of using LBA more comfortably. Quite simply, the cost just doesn't stack up, partially due to the need for huge amounts of land infill at either end - and a road tunnel too at the Yeadon end for Cemetary Road - and the presence of the Chevin which would, in any case, result in landing restrictions on runway 14.

Believe me when I say I have discussed this many times with airport directors and it has been further discussed many times at the Consultative Committee meeting. We have to accept that whenever a large amount of money is spent, there has to be payback within a given period. That is a standard business requirement in all industries. It is unfortunate that MAN's influence spreads well outside the NW when it comes to long haul. It is not only LBA that suffers - LPL has nothing and DSA has nothing, despite its super duper long runway that they keep telling us about.

So guys, if you think that the loss of ISB is going to bring about a change of heart on the runway, think again. I wish it were not so, but it is not going to happen. The best we could hope for is a relocation of the touch down point to increase landing distances on 32 and even that is well down the priority list for LBA, for pretty much the same reasons - cost v benefit doesn't stack up. Personally I don't agree on that one, as there are safety issues as well as operational, but we all want the stands and the terminal don't we? They are always going to come first and I would think a parallel taxiway will be right behind.

 

[airforced]

Your analysis and reasoning is, in my view, spot on White Heather.

I would have thought that the business case for doing something about increasing the stands would stack up and am therefore surprised that this improvement isn't being seriously spoken about by the LBA management.

What, I wonder, would it take to galvanize them in this respect? Any ideas?

 

[Moo2009]

Bridgepoint have don't great for this little airstrip but I think major investment is needed ASAP otherwise passenger numbers will be going back words, I no jet2 want to serious expand at lba put are now been held back by the lack of stands

 

[harehills]

Dont think this has anything to do with runway length PIA only started LBA to stem the tide as they were struggling to compete with airblue and they saw the success that shaheen had here. They just operated the route so nobody else could and now that airblue have stopped flying to MAN and PIA have a monopoly on the direct flights to Pakistan theyve effed off. Me and my family used the service at every opportunity. We put up with the shitty service just to support our local airport but will now never fly PIA again. As for a replacement service i beloeve our only realistic chance is shaheen. Theyve operated the route in the past and are well aware of the potential. They have a better aitcraft for the job than before and i think we woyld have seen them back alot sooner if we didnt have PIA Also airblues loyal customers would choose shaheen over PIA

 

[muscleboy33]

By extending the runway by 300metres at the 32 end and moving the touch down point back by 300metres to the flat section of the runway is problem solved.

 

[muscleboy33]

Amazing the only thing that has stopped lba becomming an even more succesfull airport is 300metres! Untill this issue is sorted it will never develop to its full potential.