Possible hitch at TDC

Here's a bit of a puzzle. There's a press release from TDC (below) that the splendid Michael Child has picked up. I can't find it on the TDC website, but that's probably because it's a rather odd and unreliable site.

The press release states that the eagerly awaited Parsons Brinckerhoff report hasn't appeared as promised on the TDC website because of "a technical problem with our external e-mails".

The puzzle is that they don't need to use external emails to post stuff on their own website, so what's the problem? Surely they're not sending the report to outside bodies for correction or approval...

---

Update on night-time flying: Independent assessment

Unfortunately we have not been able to provide a copy of the independent assessment report on the council's website today as we had hoped due to a technical problem with our external e-mails.

We will be dealing with this as a matter of urgency to ensure that the report can be published as soon as possible tomorrow.  I will e-mail a link direct to the report as soon as this is available.

Please accept our apologies.

Michael Child 23rd Jan 2012

Night flights do not mean jobs, says report

Night flights from Manston Airport will not create the 3,000 jobs promised by operators Infratil, an independent report says. The final document, compiled by specialists Parsons Brinckerhoff Ltd, was submitted to the council's Community Services Manager Madeline Homer on Thursday (19th Jan).

As exclusively revealed by the IoT Gazette on Friday 20th Jan, the report cast doubt on the economic argument for an average eight flights a night and claimed the environmental impact had been understated. The report said that if a night flying ban was to remain, the airport would only be excluded from 9 per cent of the scheduled freight market. It went on:

"Given that Manston Airport currently employs a proportionately large workforce for a small throughput, growth of passengers and freight in the short term may not necessarily lead to a significant employment and hence economic impact.

The report also said the analysis of the noise generated by airport had "resulted in an underestimation of the potential impacts on residents in the area".

The reported also recommended that Infratil's night flight proposal not be treated as a planning application meaning the decision on whether to adopt them could go before a full council.

thisiskent 23rd Jan 2012

---

Full details and analysis on this website when the report is made public.

---

44 flights a night at Manston?

On the bright side, these figures are for the upper limits allowed - it's unlikely that Manston will actually take this many, simply because it's in an inconvenient location.

However, if it gets anything like this number, it would be a useful "experiment" to show everyone what full-time scheduled night flights would be like. Perhaps it would be a good idea to hold the public consultation on night flights after the Olympics...

---

Hundreds of flights will be allowed to take off and land at Kent's airports every day during this summer's Olympics. Manston, Lydd and Rochester have been asked to take a share of the 500,000 international visitors expected during the Games. In total, the airports will have to accept up to around 370 flights a day, as all three will be regulated between July 21 and August 15 to prevent overcrowding at Heathrow.

Manston will operate round the clock to accommodate up to 192 arrivals and departures every day. A maximum of 44 aircraft will use the airport between 10pm and 7am.

As many as 126 planes will take off and land every day at Lydd, 20 of which will leave or arrive at night.

Rochester's requirement is 56 aircraft a day, although no flights will operate between midnight and 6am.

Airport Coordination Limited, the company responsible for landing slots and schedules, says the majority of visitors will travel on scheduled flights. However, it expects 700 extra charter flights and 3,000 more business jets during July and August, as VIPs make their way to the Games. An estimated 240 state flights will bring political leaders from around the world to London.

kentonline 20th Jan 2012

Pssst - want to buy an airport?

The airport's global infrastructure owners have told the Chief Executive to prepare for a sale this year. The current market for airports is rather glum, so they'll be using some cunning financial ploys to ensure they're ready for when the market picks up.

Oh, this is London City Airport, by the way...

---

London City airport owner prepares for sale. 

GIP wants new chief executive to review exit options, in hope of eventually fetching £1.25bn. The incoming chief executive of the Square Mile's favourite airport, London City, has been told by its owner to review sale options when he starts in the spring. Declan Collier, who joins from Dublin airport, has been asked by Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), which also owns Gatwick, to look at a potential sale in his first months in the job. Investment banking advisers could be selected by the end of the year.

This comes at a time of unprecedented upheaval for the airport industry. Edinburgh is up for sale, Stansted could be soon, and the Government is proposing an airport in the Thames estuary. Other options for London City, which had 7.6 per cent more passengers last year, include syndicating the equity as GIP did for Gatwick in 2010. For example, Abu Dhabi Investment Authority spent £125m for an estimated 15 per cent shareholding and Calpers, the US pension fund, dished out around £105m for a 12.7 per cent stake.

Sources close to GIP said that a banking appointment would leave City, a favourite with business due to its efficiency and proximity to London's financial centres, able to sell quickly when market conditions improve. At present, the airport would struggle to fetch much more than the £742m that GIP – then in conjunction with AIG – paid in 2006, despite significant operational improvements. In a buoyant market, GIP and the current minority stake partner Highstar Capital could expect as much as £1.25bn.

If Mr Collier recommends a sale, it is unlikely to take place until late next year when GIP can profit on its investment. A source said:

"Timing is the only thing that matters. There are different ways of exiting – GIP looks at what happened with Gatwick and selling slices as a successful model."

Mr Collier replaces Richard Gooding, who will stay on as a non-executive director at the airport. Mr Gooding declined to comment on the potential sale.

Although GIP seems set to, at least, sell down some of its stake in London City, the US-based infrastructure group is believed to be interested in buying Edinburgh airport. The deadline for initial bids on Edinburgh is next month and Royal Bank of Scotland is believed to be advising GIP on its potential offer. Edinburgh is expected to fetch in excess of £600m, though the price might be slightly depressed as it is a forced sale. The airports operator BAA has been ordered by the Competition Commission (CC) to sell-off Edinburgh, as it is considered to have a near-monopoly in Scotland, just as it was at Gatwick.

BAA, which is owned by the Spanish group Ferrovial, is still fighting the CC's ruling that it should also sell off Stansted. The CC argued that by owning Heathrow and Stansted, as well Gatwick until 2009, BAA was too dominant in the South-east. However BAA believes that Heathrow and Stansted serve different markets, the former focusing on business and the latter leisure.

The future of UK airport infrastructure was a major talking point last week, after it emerged that the Government would be consulting on the possibility of building a new airport in the Thames Estuary. This is a plan for which London Mayor Boris Johnson has lobbied hard and which would negate the need to expand at Heathrow.

Independent 22nd Jan 2012

TDC's update on night-time flying proposal

The findings of an independent assessment of the proposals and technical details for night time flying at Manston Airport have been received by the council.

The final report was submitted to the council’s Community Services Manager, Madeline Homer on Thursday 19 January and was completed by specialists, Parsons Brinckerhoff Ltd.

Before starting any public consultation on the proposals, the council had committed to carry out an independent assessment of the information it received from airport owners Infratil. 

This was so that the council could review the technical detail supplied by the airport and so that we could consider the environmental and economic impacts in the proposal.

A copy of the full report will be available to view from Monday 23 January.

from the TDC website

---

As soon as it's available, you'll be able to download your copy from this site.

Soon after that, you'll be able to read our "Readers Digest" summary of the key points and what it means for you.

Flybe, Manston, night flights and the truth

We wondered whether night flights would have made a difference to Flybe's decision to quit Manston.

After all, Charles Buchanan's constant message in the media is that night flights are essential to the airport's long-term commercial success, and Flybe is exactly the kind of high volume passenger carrier that Manston wants to attract (and keep).

So had the lack of scheduled night flights made Manston less attractive? Would scheduled night flights have persuaded Flybe to stay?

So we asked them...

---

Hi Flybe,

Nice to talk to you just now, and thanks for offering to get me an answer to my question about Flybe leaving Manston airport.

I'd like to know if it would have made a difference to Flybe's decision to leave if the local authority, Thanet District Council, had agreed to allow night-time flying at Manston.

What was the main reason for Flybe deciding to pull out of Manston?

Best wishes,

NNF

---

Hi NNF,

Thanks for your email.

Please see below for the statement available from Flybe regarding Manston Airport.

Best Wishes,

Flybe

Simon Lilley, Flybe’s Director of Marketing, comments:

“It is with regret that Flybe can confirm it will cease its operations from Manston International Airport with effect from the end of IATA Winter season on March 25th, 2012.

“Flybe carefully reviews the viability of all our 200 plus routes on a regular basis looking not only at passenger numbers but also at external cost pressures. This is done not only to monitor where we can offer increased regularity on a given route but also where passenger numbers make a flight uneconomic.

“Our ongoing commitment to Manston has been reliant on the success of the Edinburgh service that we launched in May 2010.  Despite extensive marketing of this route both in Scotland and throughout SE England, the challenging economic environment with which we are all faced has meant passenger numbers remain at unsustainable levels, and are insufficient to financially justify its continued operation.

“All passengers who have booked flights online for next summer will be contacted by Flybe and offered a full refund or re-accommodated on alternate flights; and in the interim we look forward to welcoming on board those passengers who continue to book and use our Edinburgh service from now through to the end of March.”

-Ends-

Issued by Flybe press office

T: 0845 675 0681

E: pressoffice@flybe.com

---

Hi Flybe,

I still need to know about Flybe's attitude to night flights. If Thanet Council had agreed to all night flying would Flybe have stayed at Manston? This is what some of the councillors are asserting and I need to know how much truth there is in it.

It looks from your statement that Flybe went for wider economic reasons than just the night flights but I do need you to state something about it!

So the direct question is: if there had been more night flights allowed at Manston Airport would Flybe have stayed there? Yes or No?

Best wishes,

NNF

---

Hi NNF,

Thanks for your note – the answer would be no.

Kind Regards,

Flybe

KCC says Manston is the short term answer to airport shortage

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

The county council says it will still object to a Thames Estuary airport. Kent County Council has said a public consulatation into the idea of a major new airport in the Thames Estuary will put an end to the speculatuion over proposal. The scheme has been in the headlines this week after it was revealed it would form part of an inquiry into airport capacity in the South East in March. Alex King, Deputy Leader of Kent County Council said:

“Kent County Council is very pleased that there will be a consultation on the proposed Thames Estuary airport to give everybody interested an opportunity to have their say on record and to put an end to speculation. We are still against the building of a new airport in Kent or Medway. Building a new airport on land or sea in the Thames Estuary will cause significant environment problems, and the case has not been proven that this is the correct solution to the issue. 

We believe that serious consideration also needs to be given to the short and medium term solutions. The building of a new airport will take at least a few years to come to fruitition. Increasing the use of Manston airport could help the government’s initiative to boost airport capacity in the South East in the short term.”

Sittingbourne and Sheppey MP Gordon Henderson has also come out against the idea. He said:

“I have written to David Cameron reminding him that in October 2010 he efectively said the Government had no plans to build an airport in the Thames Estuary to see if this is still the case. I have also joined with other Kent MPs whose constituencies are affected by an airport so we can have a meeting with him. My view is this is not likely to happen. It is a political ploy purely to bolster Boris Johnson’s reputation for his election campaign.

People do start worrying that their house is going to be blighted by the building of an airport and that is my main concern as there are vulnerable people out there who are taken in by this story. All the Government has said is that it will consider all options accept a third runway at Heathrow. There are a minority of people in my constituency who may welcome it because of the jobs but there are wider issues than that. You have to have a balance between introducing jobs to an area and spoiling the quality of life for everybody else.”

kentnews 19th Jan 2012

Doing battle with a naked Emperor

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

Medway Council are ready for battle. CPRE Protect Kent are ready to grab the opportunity to point out that the Emperors of Aviation are naked, and (quite brilliantly) want to inject a little democracy into the process. Best of luck guys.

---

Cllr Rodney ChambersA fierce opponent of a Thames Estuary airport has vowed to fight all the way to the top as controversial plans take a step forward. Medway Council leader Cllr Rodney Chambers wants to work with the Towns' MPs to secure a crisis meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron or Chancellor George Osborne. Mr Cameron was set to announce preliminary backing for a huge airport potentially off the Kent coast - which would dwarf the size of Heathrow - earlier this month, according to a national newspaper.

It follows plans put forward by both London Mayor Boris Johnson and world-renowned architect Lord Foster for airports on different sites around Kent. The announcement would have been linked in with the High Speed 2 rail announcement, but was put back because it was claimed by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg it was 'being rushed through', according to the paper. Now it is believed the scheme will be unveiled in March, with the Prime Minister broadly backing the plans dependent on consultation.

Cllr Chambers said:

“We tried meeting with Boris Johnson and we were fobbed off with his acolytes. We should use the MPs to secure a meeting with George Osborne and the Prime Minister. I’ve no doubt that those affected by this will be ready to fight against this proposal as they did 10 years ago. If there’s going to be a battle then so be it.”

However, county-based campaigning organisation Protect Kent welcomed the move. Campaigns manager Andrew Ogden said:

"While our views on this consultation may appear to contradict our normal stance, we anticipate that this opportunity to share all of the facts and figures behind these proposals will expose them as the futile schemes they are.

Together with other campaigning and environmental groups, we will be presenting our case against these airports in response to the consultation. We will also be calling for a referendum to be held amongst all residents likely to be impacted by these proposals, both sides of the estuary."

London Mayor Boris Johnson wants to build a floating airport in the Thames Estuary - dubbed Boris Island. And plans were announced in November by renowned architect Lord Foster for a massive hub airport off the Hoo Peninsula, taking 150m passengers each year. The scheme involves building the hub airport - with twice the capacity of Heathrow - together with a huge barrage and a new rail network system: effectively an M25 for the railways, skirting London. If built, it would the 24-hour hub would have four runways, each 4km long. An integrated rail station beneath the passenger terminal would be the UK’s busiest - with 300,000 arrivals and departures every day.

kentonline 18th Jan 2012

Estuary Airport - hot potato, fig leaf, or white elephant?

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

Wise words from Paul Francis on the awful consequences of realpolitik and the persistence of dumb ideas. The sudden (re)launch of the estuary airport idea has more to do with Boris' mayoral election bid and recent unemployment figures than strategic infrastructure planning. And then there is the blind faith that an airport automatically translates into employment and regeneration. These apparently impulsive pronouncements from politicians rarely mention the downsides of aviation, and never touch on the fact that aviation itself does not have a long-term future - when the oil runs out, what use is an airport?

---

There will be considerable dismay in some quarters that the Prime Minister appears to have agreed that the idea of an airport in the Thames Estuary should be fully investigated. But there ought not to be surprise - even if opponents will throw back at him his declaration more than a year ago that the government had 'no plans' to build such an airport. A similar commitment was given to the Rochester and Strood MP Mark Reckless by new transport secretary Justine Greening in precisely the same terms.

But it was George Osborne who paved the way for the idea of examining the scheme in November when he announced the government would 'explore all the options' for tackling the problems around aviation capacity. Even so, today's news will be seen as a U-turn and a politically awkward one given the deep hostility among his own MPs in Kent.

It is worth pointing out that there has never been any likelihood the government itself would 'build' an airport - that would be for private investment consortiums.

Some will see it as a shot in the arm for Boris Johnson's campaign to be re-elected as London Mayor although I've never been persuaded that aviation capacity is something that preoccupies London voters as much as issues like tube fares or crime. Politically, Mr Cameron will have to confront the fact that among the county's Conservative MPs, there is universal opposition. The Conservative controlled Medway Council remains wholly unconvinced - although there have been recent hints that Kent County Council may not be quite as implacably opposed as it once might have been. 

He may also be seen as having performed an about-turn and of betraying those who took him at his word that the government was not interested in the idea. Never an ideal position for a PM or for backbenchers who, in some cases, have marginal seats to defend in 2015.

What has changed? Underlying the news appears to be the feeling that aside from addressing the problem of capacity, a new airport would deliver a huge jobs boost and regenerate a part of the south east in a way no other project could conceivably get close to. Perhaps it is no coincidence the news has come out on the day that unemployment figures have shown another rise in both Kent and Medway.

Those arguments will inevitably have to be balanced against the fact that an airport would have huge environmental consequences. One thing is clear from today's news. Whatever one thinks of the idea, it can no longer be dismissed as 'pie in the sky.'

Paul on Politics, by political editor Paul Francis Wednesday, January 18 2012

Formal consultation on UK aviation

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

Thames Estuary airport plans to be examined

The government is to hold a formal consultation on UK aviation - including controversial plans for a new airport in the Thames Estuary. The study, to begin in March, will look at options for "maintaining the UK's aviation hub status".

Downing Street said no decisions had been made - London Mayor Boris Johnson backs the Thames airport idea. David Cameron has ruled out expanding Heathrow but his deputy Nick Clegg is said to be opposed to the estuary idea. Labour said the coalition was in a "complete mess" over aviation policy.

The airport would be built partly on reclaimed land and could be on either an island or a peninsula. But concerns have been raised about damage to the environment. Campaigners say the site, which is renowned for its populations of wintering birds and is an important breeding ground for avocets and marsh harriers in summer, must be protected.

In his Autumn Statement, Chancellor George Osborne did not rule out a new hub and this was seen by many as a sign that the government was warming to the scheme. David Cameron is said to be supportive of Mr Johnson's alternative to expanding Heathrow in west London but will await the outcome of the consultation. The Lib Dems oppose airport expansion in south east England.

Passenger demand for London's airports is forecast to increase from 140 million a year in 2010 to 400 million passengers a year by 2050, according to a previous report by the Greater London Authority. Colin Matthews, chief executive of airport operator BAA, which runs Heathrow, said he was pleased the government was recognising the need for more airport capacity. But he warned that London "can't have two hubs" and a new airport would inevitably mean Heathrow getting much smaller:

"The consequences of closing Heathrow wouldn't just be big for my company. It would be big for 100,000 jobs in this part of London. It's a huge issue economically, a huge issue politically."

Mr Johnson - who is running for a second term as mayor in May - told BBC Radio 4's Today programme there would be plenty of sovereign wealth funds willing to invest in the project.

"The difficulty would not be the financing of the airport per se... the difficulty obviously would be in the infrastructure, connectivity between the airport and central London, and that's why the consultation is essential. We can't go on expecting Britain to compete with France, Germany and other European countries when we simply can't supply the flights to these growth destinations - China, Latin America. We are being badly left behind."

But other candidates for London mayor have all expressed their opposition to the idea. Labour's Ken Livingstone said:

"An airport in the Thames threatens a huge increase in noise, congestion and pollution for millions of people in the east and south east of London, especially Bromley, Bexley, Havering and Barking. It also threatens hundreds of thousands of the jobs in west London who rely on Heathrow."

Lib Dem hopeful Brian Paddick said Heathrow would be "closed down" if the estuary airport was built, causing "devastation" in the area.

"It's a complete fantasy, all the local authorities and the airlines are against the idea, it's just a cynical move by the Tories to try to make the mayor look credible."

And the Green Party's Jenny Jones said airport capacity should not be expanded at all in the south east:

"If we were to end unnecessary flights to short haul destinations, space would be freed up for essential long haul flights and there would be no need to build another airport."

The RSPB, Medway Council and Kent County Council have opposed the Thames Estuary idea, saying it is "undeliverable, unaffordable and unnecessary".

The GMB union's civil aviation industry national officer, Mick Rix, also said the estuary plan was "plain daft" and called on all parties to look again at the possibility of a third runway at Heathrow.

Friends of the Earth's executive director Andy Atkins said a new airport in the Thames Estuary "would have a devastating impact on local communities and the environment".

In May 2010 plans for a third runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow were scrapped when the coalition government took office. BAA withdrew its plans for a second runway at Stansted at the same time and any expansion of Gatwick before 2019 has also been ruled out. A Department for Transport spokesman said "no decisions have been taken", adding:

"The government will consult on a sustainable framework for UK aviation this spring, at which time we will set out our long-term plans for the sector."

The idea for an airport somewhere in the Thames Estuary was first conceived in 1943, and many alternative locations and schemes have been proposed. One scheme would see runways built on artificial islands in the estuary and connected via rail shuttle links to terminals on the mainland.

Another recent, much larger concept devised by architect Sir Norman Foster involves an integrated air and high-speed rail hub built on reclaimed land near Grain in northern Kent.

The high speed rail link to London would traverse the river by a new barrier crossing, which would offer greater flood protection and generate power through tidal energy.

BBC online 18th Jan 2012