Jump to content

The Future Of Core Air Links To The Island


madmanxpilot
 Share

Recommended Posts

How about setting up our own airline and flying to Northolt (Ruislip - 13 miles to centre)

 

There was a strong rumour last spring that Flybe were after flying from there, those in the business would know, but I dont think its currently available for scheduled flights?, I am sure there are plenty of NIMBY's round there to stop it.

 

It would be ideal though, near LHR as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The proverbial will hit the fan when Flybe announce that they are looking to terminate the DOH hospital agreement unless IOMG are willing to stump up more for the service.

 

ETA: Flybe have us by the short & curlies.

Citywing could do it again via Chester in that case

As I understand it one of the reasons why Flybe was chosen was because of bigger aircraft = more room for people with disabilities and the handling equipment require to get people on the aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So the pertinent question now is surely, should we be throwing money at maintaining air links, and is the Flybe option the best way of doing it?

 

If you are going to throw our money into it there it would make sense to use crew that lived locally. At least then some of the money invested would come back to the Island.

I understand the logic of that, but that does not necessarily mean the best approach might actually be Flybe. As asitis mentioned, there are a wide variety of options, but the best option and overriding option should be value for taxpayers money and ideally no taxpayers money should be involved. Some thinking outside of the box needs to be done on this. 'Subsidising' one airline and not another is both immoral and unfair IMO, as it is is for other sectors.

 

The Manx taxpayer should not effectively be having to nationalise jobs or provide support for jobs (Flybe or Sefton for example). We already pour money to do that into government, civil and public services with probably £100M of that effectively wasted every year given the over extended scope, high pensions and salaries involved.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking aloud I had in mind leased aircraft, we own the airport so low or no fees, after all we already pay long millions for that, engineering here via EAM who would imo be only too pleased for a contractual obligation which could include a certain amount of guarantees re employment for apprenticeships etc. The travelling public would have to be educated re the destinations it would be financially possible to fly into and yes if we have the capacity lets shaft others after all thats what keeps happening to us the taxpayers ! Oh and for gods sake lose some deadweight from the management !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

So the pertinent question now is surely, should we be throwing money at maintaining air links, and is the Flybe option the best way of doing it?

If we had the right people in charge you could at a stretch view this as an opportunity rather than a disaster, without a wholesale overhaul of those who effect transport policy and some imaginative blood in management positions I don't see that we can do too much. A pity as there are all sorts of angles which could be explored.

 

I thought similar. No longer can this shower of shite in charge sit on their hands spouting the same 'Open Skies is Good' mantra while everything around them implodes. Someone, somewhere needs to show some leadership now but with Cretin and Reynolds in charge neither of them has the commercial nous and basic brainpower to do that.

You won't get any commitment from any of the ministers.... even from the top....according to the current Mrs Andy Onchan the CM stated this morning on radio that he was "disappointed" by what Mr. Liddiard had to say at the TravelWatch meeting and that it's not the Island's problem but Flybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So the pertinent question now is surely, should we be throwing money at maintaining air links, and is the Flybe option the best way of doing it?

If we had the right people in charge you could at a stretch view this as an opportunity rather than a disaster, without a wholesale overhaul of those who effect transport policy and some imaginative blood in management positions I don't see that we can do too much. A pity as there are all sorts of angles which could be explored.

 

I thought similar. No longer can this shower of shite in charge sit on their hands spouting the same 'Open Skies is Good' mantra while everything around them implodes. Someone, somewhere needs to show some leadership now but with Cretin and Reynolds in charge neither of them has the commercial nous and basic brainpower to do that.

You won't get any commitment from any of the ministers.... even from the top....according to the current Mrs Andy Onchan the CM stated this morning on radio that he was "disappointed" by what Mr. Liddiard had to say at the TravelWatch meeting and that it's not the Island's problem but Flybe.

He and his cohorts are the fucking islands problem !!!!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flybe may have many problems. The IOM is not one of them - they don't give a toss about the IOM.

 

Mr Bell should be worrying about the IOM - that is his job. Therefore this is HIS problem.

Agreed 100% and would add Flybe are similar they are only here because of favourable terms in the UK, this lot kid themselves of our importance on the world stage !

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flybe may have many problems. The IOM is not one of them - they don't give a toss about the IOM.

 

Mr Bell should be worrying about the IOM - that is his job. Therefore this is HIS problem.

 

Sometimes these muppets in charge are so used to talking in political speak, deflecting everything onto someone else, that they start to become delusional and think nothing is ever their problem/fault. He probably genuinely believes the island is hard done by and that it's just unlucky we're soon to have the most literal description of 'open skies' we've ever had over our airspace.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking aloud I had in mind leased aircraft, we own the airport so low or no fees, after all we already pay long millions for that, engineering here via EAM who would imo be only too pleased for a contractual obligation which could include a certain amount of guarantees re employment for apprenticeships etc. The travelling public would have to be educated re the destinations it would be financially possible to fly into and yes if we have the capacity lets shaft others after all thats what keeps happening to us the taxpayers ! Oh and for gods sake lose some deadweight from the management !

Some internet browsing and chats with various people, here are some rough figures. A Dash 400 costs about £1M per year to lease, £500K per year to staff, and uses about £1.5M in fuel, so about £3M a year, plus maintenance, landing fees, insurance, etc., call that another £500K. £3.5M per annum. Round it up a bit and that is £10K per day to run. According to Flybe, their LGW service runs at 60% capacity on average, or around 50 pax per flight. So £10K divided by 200 pax (2 x LGW returns) is £50 per sector (£100 return). Any additional pax or other flights that the plane does per day would be for "profit".

 

So, if IOMG backed (insured?) someone who could lease one aircraft, do a morning and evening London return (probably City), the rest of the day could be used to do perhaps a Glasgow return and a Liverpool return (Hospital run?) it could actually create employment and make money, provided they did not overcharge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thinking aloud I had in mind leased aircraft, we own the airport so low or no fees, after all we already pay long millions for that, engineering here via EAM who would imo be only too pleased for a contractual obligation which could include a certain amount of guarantees re employment for apprenticeships etc. The travelling public would have to be educated re the destinations it would be financially possible to fly into and yes if we have the capacity lets shaft others after all thats what keeps happening to us the taxpayers ! Oh and for gods sake lose some deadweight from the management !

Some internet browsing and chats with various people, here are some rough figures. A Dash 400 costs about £1M per year to lease, £500K per year to staff, and uses about £1.5M in fuel, so about £3M a year, plus maintenance, landing fees, insurance, etc., call that another £500K. £3.5M per annum. Round it up a bit and that is £10K per day to run. According to Flybe, their LGW service runs at 60% capacity on average, or around 50 pax per flight. So £10K divided by 200 pax (2 x LGW returns) is £50 per sector (£100 return). Any additional pax or other flights that the plane does per day would be for "profit".

 

So, if IOMG backed (insured?) someone who could lease one aircraft, do a morning and evening London return (probably City), the rest of the day could be used to do perhaps a Glasgow return and a Liverpool return (Hospital run?) it could actually create employment and make money, provided they did not overcharge.

Slot fees?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

How about setting up our own airline and flying to Northolt (Ruislip - 13 miles to centre)

And those that have onward flights to the rest of the world connect where, exactly?

 

LHR is 7.5 miles away - 15 minutes by car / taxi / minibus. Northolt tube is on the Central Line, so not bad for getting into town. It would be a good compromise if it were possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...