Airport expansion could bring 3,500 jobs

New research for Manston airport owners Infratil shows that the airport could create 3,500 jobs in the local economy, but only if more flexibility is allowed for night flights. The study by aviation consultants York Aviation into the economic impact of Manston suggests it would contribute nearly £65 million a year to the local economy by 2018, if its masterplan development is realised.

The research indicates the airport would provide direct employment for 2,070 people and a further 1,035 jobs in the wider economy by 2018, on the basis of the masterplan. The findings reinforce the claims in the airport's masterplan and Infratil's vision of developing a South East regional airport that would offer scheduled passenger services, chartered flights and handling international freight.

The report was commissioned by Infratil after Thanet council asked for more information about the impact of night flying and the economic value of the airport. This came after the authority was asked to consider lifting the ban on aircraft using the airport after 11pm and before 7am. The results of the research were released this week as work continues on a new multimillion-pound radar system at the airport and a three-times-a-week passenger service, scheduled by Flybe, was launched to Belfast City.

Using data from the masterplan, the airport's customers and aviation industry, York Aviation concluded that the ability to handle some aircraft movements between 11pm and 7am would be necessary for Manston to attract a low-cost airline with planes based at the airport, as well as handle greater levels of freight from around the world. Charles Buchanan, chief executive of Manston airport, said:

"Our aspiration is to have aircraft actually based at the airport as this would significantly increase the number of routes we could serve and passengers arriving and departing from Manston. Persuading airlines to base planes at the airport would generate further local employment opportunities for cabin crew and additional airport jobs. Despite the present economic situation we remain confident that airlines will choose Manston and build upon our Flybe services and charter services. The research examined the viability of the airport's masterplan and concluded that the aspiration to become a sustainable South East regional airport could only be achieved by Manston ensuring it has a mix of passenger and freight services using the airport."

The masterplan shows the airport handling 2.2 million passengers and 167,000 tonnes of freight by 2018. This research shows that these levels are achievable, provided the management of the night-flying policy is implemented. Mr Buchanan added:

"We recognise that the issue of night flights is a high-profile one within the district and we are currently developing our detailed proposal and hope to be in a position to submit it shortly, and then for public consultation to begin."

York Aviation is in the process of finalising the second part of the research, which will assess the impact that the imposition of a stringent night movement policy would have on the airport's economic impact and commercial operation.

IoT Gazette 27th May 2011

Airport gets new radar system - to prevent mistakes

Manston Airport is to have a new multi-million pound radar system to ensure offshore wind turbines are not mistaken for aircraft. Thales, a global aerospace technology company, is to replace the existing radar and air traffic display system.

The new system is designed to present a clearer picture to air traffic controllers and boost reliability and safety. Rotating wind turbine blades can cause so-called radar clutter that resembles the picture from a moving aircraft. The situation is expected to worsen with the development of wind farms in the Thames Estuary off Thanet, including Thanet Offshore and London Array.

The new system will be linked to a transponder zone over the wind farms. Charles Buchanan, airport chief executive, said the state-of-the-art system would allow aircraft to continue to fly safely and efficiently over the wind farms. The airport is owned by Infratil, a New Zealand company. Mr Buchanan added:

"This major investment demonstrates our owner's commitment to the future of Manston Airport and ensures the continued operation of the airport alongside the development of the offshore wind farms. As the growth of wind energy increases, it's vital that the nationally-important industries of aviation and renewables develop together to support the UK's recovering economy."

David Lockwood, head of Thales UK's air operations business, said:

"The Thales radar is ideal for Manston due to the large offshore wind farms that lie close to the airport. This contract builds upon the successful Thales ATM systems, at Inverness, Belfast International, and Cardiff airports, and reinforces our position as a leading supplier of radar and display systems to regional airports and the UK civil ATM market."

kentonline 7th Jan 2011

Thales supplies surveillance radars to Kent airport

Thales has signed a contract with Manston, Kent’s International Airport for the programme management, supply and installation of co-mounted primary surveillance and monopulse mode-S secondary surveillance radars, complete with Eurocat-C1 air traffic control (ATC) system.

Manston currently operates with a legacy, raw video, primary surveillance radar (PSR) and procures a feed of monopulse secondary surveillance radar (MSSR) data - but due to the ongoing development of three large offshore windfarms in the Thames Estuary, the legacy PSR detects returns from the turbines that are displayed as significant areas of clutter.

Thales will deliver its STAR 20002 and co-mounted RSM 970 S3 mode-S MSSR radar equipment, which are solid-state radars that will feed data into the Thales Eurocat-C radar display system. These systems will enter into operation before the end of 2011.

TheEngineer.co.uk

Warning to TDC and Infratil over Manston

Thanet District Council and Infratil, the owners of Manston Airport, have been warned they could end up in the High Court if the night-flights consultation process is botched. The warning has come from Paul Twyman, the chairman of airport watchdog the Kent International Airport Consultative Committee (KIACC).

An application from Infratil is expected to be placed in under two weeks and will detail the number of planes the company wants to be allowed to fly in and out of the airport between 11pm and 7am. There are concerns that any consultation will be undermined by lack of noise-monitoring data, an unclear policy about the routes that planes can take approaching and departing the airport, and the robustness of the consultation procedure.

The results of a noise-assesment report being prepared by consultancy Bickerdike Allen Partners, and commissioned by Infratil, should also be made available to the public before the consultation starts, many people are arguing. They say that any report is assessed and reviewed before a consultation starts – not during it. Mr Twyman said:

"I urge the council to think very carefully about they way in which they handle this consultation. If you go ahead with a half-baked process, if you make a hash of it, then I’m sure there will be people out there who would take a dim view of that – and I suspect there will be people who seek a judicial review. KIACC has spotted a pretty big hole here. It’s clear that in the last seven years a lot of nettles have not been grasped and now the time has come for KIACC to start to help the council to grasp those nettles. If the council go off half-cocked on this consultation, it could find itself in the High Courts. The night noise consultation could be starting in about 14 days and there are big issues around it."

The Section 106 agreement, a document that governs flight times and routes, is also out of date and needs to be revised, says Mr Twyman. The consultation will take place over a 12-week period and will involve meetings, phone polls, roadshow sessions and questionnaires. However, delays while reports are digested and analysed could mean that the process runs into Christmas. Brian White, Thanet council’s director of regeneration, said the local authority had not seen Infratil’s figures for the quota-count system, despite claims that people at the council had already seen them. When asked by Steve Higgins of the No Night Flights campaign if he had seen the proposed quota-count number, Mr White said:

"The Freedom of Information Act requires that anything the council holds it releases, but we haven’t got anything."

Nick Cole, of Monkton Parish Council, said: "It strikes me that there is probably a lot more work being done than we are being led to believe here:

"If the consultation is about to start in a matter of weeks, then I think it would be fair that some of the figures be given tonight. We must have an indication about how many flights we are talking about during night-time."

Charles Buchanan, the airport’s chief executive, responded by saying:

"I am not in a position to give a final number. You do not release half the specification in advance – you launch the whole thing when people can see the whole picture. They can see the benefits on one hand and the problems of the other. It would be misleading and diverting to look at just one part of it and that’s where we are."

At the meeting in public at the airport terminal on Friday last week, KIACC members voted against holding a meeting at the "other end of the runway" for villagers in places such as Monkton, Minster and St Nicholas-at-Wade. After a request for more information to be made available to more people, Mr Twyman proposed a series of meetings to inform the public in the villages and Herne Bay, but it was voted down. Conservative councillor Roger Latchford, Thanet council’s cabinet member who deals with the airport, voted against such meetings. However, a meeting on the application will take place in Ramsgate.

During the meeting it also emerged that the council’s mobile noise-monitor, which should be used to monitor the noise made by aircraft overflying areas such as St Nicholas, is still out of operation. Chris Wells, the council’s Conservative cabinet member for the environment, said it should be back in use – and in an airport employee’s garden – very soon as it had taken longer than expected to be fixed.

The airport’s application for a secondary radar tower has received planning consent. It will be built after the contract has been put out to tender. Four objections to the application had been received, but Mr White said that there were "no material reasons" why the application could not be approved, on Friday, August 6.

yourthanet.co.uk

Buchanan hails return of scheduled flights

A new airport chief has hailed the return of scheduled services as a major milestone for Manston. Charles Buchanan, who has completed his first month as the new chief executive at Kent International Airport, joined the Manston operation, run by New Zealand company Infratil, shortly after the launch of Flybe scheduled services to Edinburgh. A new service to Manchester is due to start in September. Flybe is the first scheduled operator to use KIA since the demise of EUjet several years ago.

Mr Buchanan has taken over from Matt Clarke who has returned to his native New Zealand. He was previously strategy and communications director at London City Airport, and has also held posts with Channel Tunnel operator Eurotunnel. Mr Buchanan said:

"The restarting of daily passenger services to Edinburgh in May was a major milestone for Manston. The commitment that Flybe have shown by announcing daily departures to Manchester too is an endorsement of the work of the team and the potential the airport has to offer. Having a successful regional airport is a major element in the regeneration of an area, not only by providing direct employment, but also giving access to the markets of the world."

Infratil is aiming to invest £3m in a new radar system at Manston which is designed to ensure the airport is able to operate successfully as wind farms are developed offshore the Thanet coast, including the giant London Array.

kentonline 28th Jul 2010

Consultation to follow flight figures

Clipping: thisiskent

Manston airport will reveal how many planes it wants to fly at night before a survey is taken of residents' views. The airport's new chief executive Charles Buchanan told the Isle of Thanet Gazette this week he will tell Thanet council the number of "night flight quota points" the airport wants within the next three weeks. The council will then, in September, run a public consultation on the issue and the airport's future.

Mr Buchanan, who took over the running of the airport two weeks ago, said:

"The consultation needs the figure and we are going to be providing it. There would be no point in carrying out a meaningless consultation without the number and only have to consult again at a later date. It is in everybody's interests that we come forward with the figure, and we will be."

Last February the airport's owner Infratil applied to extend the time it takes the bulk of its flights by an extra hour in the morning, to after 6am, and an extra half hour in the evening, to before 11.30pm. It has also applied to increase the number of planes it is allowed to land and have take-off between those hours. More than a year later, Thanet council is still waiting for some details of the application and the delay has caused some anger among councillors. At a meeting of the council's Airport Working Party on Monday, chairman Mike Harrison said:

"They have treated the people of Thanet with contempt over the last 12 months. We have had to wait and see if something is going to start. I hope now finally something is going to happen."

He warned that if the airport was not forthcoming with the figure, the council could reject the application altogether. A new radar mast is needed at Manston airport because of the Thanet Offshore Wind Farm. The airport has applied to build a new radar tower on its site that is not affected by the background radar noise created by the wind farm's 100 turbines. Mr Buchanan said:

"It's a slightly different radar system that can block out the disruption caused by the turbines and pick out an aircraft."

Experts from the RAF have expressed fears that too many wind farms in the English Channel could create security risks to the UK by allowing foreign aircraft to fly to our shores undetected.

CCC's Regeneration Department

My favourite starfish

In the interests of spreading our love and help far and wide we (Mrs Earplugs and I) met up with some of the Canterbury people who will be dealing with Thanet District Council over the next few months while Infratil’s Masterplan is being goggled at.

It turned out to be a useful and encouraging way to spend a morning. There was a big cheese from CCC’s Environmental Health bods, the top banana from their Regeneration department, and Cllr Mike Patterson, who is on the KIACC. (I couldn’t help wondering: if you snip bits off people from Regeneration, do they simply re-grow, like starfish? If so, it offers an easy way to ramp up the staffing levels.)

The plan was to provide them with enough armour, ammunition, sticks and carrots for them to be able to nudge Thanet away from a worst-of-all-possible-worlds outcome. The mighty wodge of words, numbers and pictures we gave them can be summarised thus:

• The Draft Masterplan for KIA is indicative but insubstantial – it needs to be redrafted, and then put out to consultation properly.
• The Section 106 Agreement should reflect the needs of everyone affected by the operation of the airport, not just Infratil and TDC.
• There is absolutely no need or justification for night flights (other than emergency diversions).
• Flight paths should avoid population centres by overflying the sea, or sparsely populated land.
• If overflying towns is unavoidable, the planes could fly higher for longer, and then descend more steeply.
• These ‘people-friendly’ routes should be agreed and implemented before flight volumes increase.
• Infratil must demonstrate that the routes are being adhered to by recording and reporting what the planes actually do.
• Infratil must install adequate noise and pollution monitoring equipment.
• The noise monitoring equipment must be used consistently.
• The readings from all the monitoring equipment must be recorded consistently.
• The recorded readings must be published frequently and regularly (e.g. on-line).
• Failure to comply with the S106 agreement must be reported and fined. Any decisions not to fine must be explained.

As you can see, all good reasonable stuff, and they seemed to buy into it. In all fairness, we all know that Canterbury are no more than consultees in this process, and have no effective Vulcan death-grip that they could apply, other than possibly dragging everything through the courts. In that respect they are about as powerless as a Thanet resident. Nonetheless, they are prepared to listen politely, pay attention and take notes – which puts them in my good books. It remains to be seen how much they can influence Thanet, but I shall keep fuelling them.

YES WE CAN: monitor

Yes we can: the story so far… Infratil need Manston to be very busy; night flights are a bad thing; and the daytime flight paths must be designed to be as people-friendly as possible. So what happens next? Step aboard the time machine of your imagination, and gracefully swoop into the future…

Let’s suppose that Infratil have impressed everyone with their keenness to encourage clean and quiet planes to fly as cleanly and quietly as possible, at considerate times of day, where there are least people. Marvellous. I for one would be proud to brandish their commitment as an example to airport operators across the country. But how could I prove that their high ideals were the real deal?

This very question was addressed in the 2005 Alan Stratford & Associates report to Thanet District Council when they were reviewing the S106 agreement with PlaneStation:

To properly manage noise and environmental matters related to the operation and future growth of the airport, it will be essential to have in place a rigorous and comprehensive monitoring process. This needs to be adequately resourced, in terms of equipment and staff, and have in place clear and measurable targets and standards which have been mutually agreed, with related penalties for non-compliance. Demonstrable monitoring and enforcement is essential, also, in regard to the confidence within the surrounding communities that the airport’s activities are taking place under the influence and control of the Council.

Simply put, monitoring is the only way of being sure whether we are getting lots of dirt and noise, or little dirt and noise. Anyone who is not constantly working towards the latter needs to be taken out and flogged. In a constructive, educational and empowering way.

There are established and reliable technologies available for monitoring the presence and immediate environmental impacts of carbon dioxide and other gases, fumes, particulates, droplets, leakages and spillages. Given the towns at either end of the runway; the surrounding farmland; the underlying aquifers; the commercial sea fishing; the internationally important conservation areas; and the Isle of Thanet’s vulnerability to climate change, it’s in everyone’s interests that these monitoring systems should meet or exceed the highest statutory requirements. I don’t doubt for a moment that there would be no shortage of advice and support from Natural England, CPRE Kent, Kent Wildlife Trust, etc, etc. It’s all just there for the asking.

Noise and location are obviously closely linked. The Civil Aviation Authority has clear guidelines for what constitutes best practice for noise monitoring – at least two fixed microphones at each end of the runway, and at least one mobile microphone for measurements further from the airport. Historically, Manston’s noise monitoring has been sub-standard – as far as I know it’s still not up to scratch. Their radar has also been very basic, relying on a PSR system.

Primary Surveillance Radar (PSR) is akin to a bat’s echolocation: the transmitter emits a powerful pulse, some of which is reflected back – the reflection and the delay indicate the direction and distance of an object.

Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) is more like a conversation. The transmitter sends a question and a transponder on the plane replies with information gleaned from the cockpit instruments. Again, the delay in the answer arriving indicates the distance; the answer itself confirms the distance and identifies the aircraft, location, speed, bearing, height, etc.

To monitor adherence to agreed routes and altitudes, SSR is essential. An airport can buy its own SSR system, or hire SSR feeds from a third party. In a recent phone conversation, Matt Clarke of Infratil said that Manston currently rents SSR feeds from the MoD. However, TDC don’t seem to be aware of this:

TDC’s Airport Working Party’s recent minutes state “It was understood that at the outset of a new service featuring some night-time aircraft movements, the secondary radar capability necessary to operate web tracking would not be affordable. However, an appropriate threshold of business levels ought to be established for its introduction.”

Similarly, “Noise abatement routes can only be monitored if secondary radar capacity is provided. This represents a considerable investment which cannot be justified by current aircraft usage. A threshold of aircraft usage should be set for its introduction.”

The impression I get is that in their conversations with TDC, Infratil are quoting a figure of £2½ million for their own SSR system (probably accurate) and using this as an excuse for not getting it yet, and thereby being unable to monitor their planes. This is, at best, disingenuous. For low volumes of traffic, it makes sense to hire a feed; when volumes increase sufficiently, the cost/benefit equation will tip in favour of buying their own. It’s a straightforward commercial decision – this is the cost of doing business.

Infratil are doing themselves no favours by trying to avoid monitoring by hiding behind the largest quotable cost. They have a duty of care to everyone on the ground, and everyone in the aircraft, to know exactly where everything is in the airspace over East Kent. Quite frankly, if they’re even hinting at not taking this seriously, they’re not fit to run an airport.

So there we have another solid pillar for the S106 Agreement: the immediate provision and consistent use of excellent monitoring equipment. Common sense demands it. TDC are perfectly within in their rights to request it. If Infratil were shrewd, they would forestall the issue by taking advice from the relevant aviation and environmental bodies and installing top notch monitoring systems. It wouldn’t be hard for them to present it as evidence of a green conscience, willingness to be a good neighbour, etc. It could win them friends. Everyone needs friends.

Better monitoring needs better radar

Altitude thickness

In the Olden Days (2005), Manston’s radar wasn’t good enough to tell them exactly where their planes were. They couldn’t tell the exact height because they only had Primary Surveillance Radar.

In the Modern Age (2009) they also have Secondary Surveillance Radar (they buy a feed from the MoD) so they can now tell the height of planes as they pass over Herne Bay. And elsewhere, presumably.

But they don’t record it.

This is perplexing me. Given the aviation industry’s healthy obsession with safety statistics and analysis, I would have thought that recording the actual position, speed and direction of all aircraft within detectable range of any airport would be encouraged to the point of compulsion.

This begs a question: when someone (like me) complains to KIA about low, noisy, off-route planes (as I have), how can they possibly be so certain that the plane was at an appropriate height, given that they have no record of it?

Another question: for a presumably modest outlay, Infratil would be able to to publish clear, accurate information about flight patterns, like this example from Luton Airport. How can they resist? It's a very effective way of letting everyone know exactly what's happening.

Oops. Did I just answer my own question?

Airport without radar until end of the year

Kent International Airport has been without radar following a lightning strike in May. Vital air traffic control equipment at the former RAF Battle of Britain base at Manston, was knocked out during a major thunderstorm and won't be replaced until the end of the year. At the moment jumbo jet pilots are using their eyes to get onto Britain's longest runway but neighbouring residents are worried. Bernard Clayson is a member of St Nicholas at Wade parish council and a member of the local airport consultative committee. He said:

"At the moment pilots are virtually sticking their heads out of the window to line themselves up on the runway. We've noticed that aircraft are coming in lower than usual. Large freight aircraft and 747s on training flights come into Manston. It's all very well saying that it is safe to fly into the airport even though it has no radar but what happens when the mist rolls in and covers the airfield in fog?"

Canterbury City Council Liberal Democrat Leader Alex Perkins said members of his group had  been approached by residents in Herne Bay directly under the flight path. He said:

"People are alarmed at the height of the planes as they come in. Some of them are very big and it doesn't help their confidence to be told that air traffic control radar at Manston has been out of action since last May. We fear lack of radar may cause a serious accident."

Their concern has been passed to the chief executive of Thanet Council who has asked for assurances that the airfield is operating safely. Traffic levels at the Kent airfield dropped when low-cost airline EUjet went into liquidation last May. Airport operator Infratil Airports Europe has been looking to attract replacement carriers to the Isle of Thanet airfield. A new service linking Manston with Virginia is due to start next year and some tourist flights already operate from the airfield. The airfield is often seen on television as large Russian-built cargo planes use Manston as a base for relief operations.
 
The operators are installing new radar to accommodate the increased traffic they are expecting at Manston but it has taken longer than expected to install. A spokesman for the British Airline Pilots Association said he hoped the new radar would be in service as quickly as possible but hat they view the situation at Manston with "concern". The radar knocked out in May had already been giving cause for concern as it was at least 30 years old and due for replacement.
 
The Civil Aviation Authority said traffic levels into Manston meant aircraft could operate safely. Neil Richardson, spokesman for Infratil Airports Europe said the new system would give Manston state-of-the-art radar cover. He said:

"Rather than repair an ageing radar, which was severely damaged by a lightning strike in May this year, we decided to invest in a replacement system which is currently being installed and which we hope will be operational by the end of the year. Radar is used in air traffic control to assist the flow of aircraft in and out of an airport. In the absence of radar at Kent International the flow of aircraft is reduced to approximately one arrival and one departure every 10 minutes. Therefore, while the absence of radar places time constraints on an airport, given the low level of traffic currently using Kent International, this is not an issue. The measures currently in place have been approved by the Civil Aviation Authority and are not unusual for airfields of a similar size and capability to Kent International."

KentNews 25th Sep 2006