Waterford Airport in Danger of Closing!?

dayshah

But its only a helicopter. Surely they don't need taxiways and so on? Just a hanger for maintenance, and maybe a radar?

kensutz

They take off in the same manner as an airplane. They don't simply go straight up and down.

Flyer1

Trotter wrote: »

Thats independent. They're in their own section of the airport.

dayshah wrote: »

But its only a helicopter. Surely they don't need taxiways and so on? Just a hanger for maintenance, and maybe a radar?

Both untrue.

As mul mentioned above, the SAR facility require an Air Traffic Service for all departures and arrivals from Waterford Aerodrome as it is a controlled aerodrome. There is no out of hours facility currently at the airport.

@dayshah in order for the SAR to complete its rescue missions in bad weather they require certain navigational aids ( Instrument Landing System, non directional beacon, distance measuring equipment etc ). Without these aids flight in poor weather conditions would be impossible to complete. Waterford does not current operate a Radar facility and the cost to install would be huge.

If Waterford Airport was to close, SAR operations, 2 light aircraft maintenance firms, the flying club, the flight school, all the spin off businesses will cease to exist thus losing more jobs.

As someone who has been using the airport as a commercial passenger and a private pilot for years all i'll say is that i've seen it all before.

Deise Tom

Flyer1 wrote: »

If Waterford Airport was to close, SAR operations, 2 light aircraft maintenance firms, the flying club, the flight school, all the spin off businesses will cease to exist thus losing more jobs.

Which is why i said i expect the politions that we have now to make the same noises now as they did with the former minister for Transport tried to cut the helecopters hours last year. So far John Halligan is the only one of them to go public and to say that he was disapointed. LAst time out they were very quick of the hop but are slow this time. Maybe the next few days we will hear from them.

merlante

Paudie Coffey tweeted this department of transport report.

Interestingly, even though it is the likely source for most of the information in the Irish Times article, it disagrees on one crucial point: that Waterford Airport should have its subvention taken away. It recommends instead that Waterford be put on a kind of probation for a few years in which it should justify its existence.

If Varadkar is using a report to justify effectively shutting down airports, it is very difficult to justify using the same report to effectively shut an airport that the report recommends should be retained.

Recommendations

• Exchequer support for regional airports in Connaught should be focused on Knock Airport, which can adequately serve both Galway and Sligo with a greater range of services than offered by Galway or Sligo Airports. This focus on Knock should also increase Knock’s “critical mass” and enhance its finances. Galway city will also have the benefit of improving journey times to Shannon Airport.
• The Donegal-Dublin PSO service should be retained and the PSO services from Dublin to Kerry, Galway, Sligo, Knock and Derry should be ended. Donegal is relatively remote in Irish terms. The cost per passenger of subsidising PSO services is difficult to justify at the other airports having regard to improved public transport and/or road journey times to Dublin. A commercial service from Dublin to Kerry may be feasible because of latent demand for the current service (100,000 passengers per annum).
• Continuing OPEX support at Donegal, Knock, Kerry and Waterford should be provided subject to stringent assessment of annual requests for subvention and encouragement of greater efficiency through the use of benchmarking/ performance indicators.
• Opex support for Galway and Sligo should end.
• Capex grants would be confined to essential safety and security work and would be of the order of €10m in the next few years.

The recommended retention of Opex support for Waterford is a finely balanced one. It reflects a view that the Airport could contribute to developing tourism in the South East and recognises that it is the only provincial city that would have a 2-hour surface journey time to a State Airport (Cork and Dublin Airport will be about 2 hours away). All of the other provincial cities will have an hour’s journey time or less.

Of course it is generally not the practice of these reports to look into the past to see why exactly Waterford isn't as developed as it could be, and places like Knock are very well developed. To a certain degree, airports are being punished for being starved of funding (jet facilities); whilst airports which were in receipt of a level of funding completely incommensurate with their population catchments and/or business/tourism needs (bordering on the corrupt) are rewarded.

Considering Waterford airport's current phase of development can be said to have commenced only in 2003, before which it was at the point of closure due to a total lack of support over many years, it has made a lot of ground in the period since.

Dum_Dum

Since aviation has boomed for the last decade across Europe, does anyone know whether the Airport has exceeded this average growth or fallen short? What I am trying to say is has it outperformed or underperformed?

sunnysoutheast

Does anyone know for certain how far short Waterford is from being able to support (smaller) jet operations - i.e. CRJ/Emb. 190 and the like now? BA now run an excellent service to Europe from London City using 190s. I know 146/RJs can land, but I assume it would be some way away from being able to support the return requirements of a fully laden 737-800 or A320.

SSE

tankbarry

as far as I am aware the passengers are steady..... southend route isnt doing good at the moment. Luton is doing well

Neworder79

sunnysoutheast wrote: »

Does anyone know for certain how far short Waterford is from being able to support (smaller) jet operations - i.e. CRJ/Emb. 190 and the like now? BA now run an excellent service to Europe from London City using 190s. I know 146/RJs can land, but I assume it would be some way away from being able to support the return requirements of a fully laden 737-800 or A320.

SSE

There is no straight answer as every flight is different requiring a calculation balancing aircraft/fuel/pax weight, engine performance, atmospheric and runway conditions to give the required safe takeoff distance.

If you take a common 100 seat example, like the Embarier 190 jet:
- the stated average takeoff requirement at max weight is 2056m.
- the stated average landing requirement at max weight is 1323m.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airliners_by_Maximum_Takeoff_Weight

I'm sure WAT runway could handle some of the smaller regional jets. But that alone does not make a route viable.
Shorter runways may mean fuel or passenger weight restrictions, restricting maximum range and ticket revenue. They may require higher thrust rated engines with associated maintenance costs.

Modern landing aids such as ILS guidance systems, approach lighting, adequate fire cover and handling systems are expected to guarantee service in all conditions.

The reason there are so many small jets serving european capitals from regional airports in the UK is the larger population densities and demand for business travel.

By their nature small jets with fewer seats are more costly to run per passenger than a turboprop or larger jet. While there may be some demand from business in the SE region, the availability of a large enough market willing to pay a premium to fly locally is far from guaranteed at WAT.

merlante

From wikipedia:

Year Passengers [P] % Change [P] Movements [M] % Change [M]
2003 24,000 12% - -
2004 55,000 22% - -
2005 71,000 13% - -
2006 85,000 12% 23,724 -
2007 116,000 13% 30,156 21%
2008 144,000 12% 29,811 1%
2009 112,000 -11% - -
2010 104,000 -7% - -

The thing is, Aer Arann are responsible for almost 100% of the traffic at the moment, so changes to their business has a big impact on Waterford one way or the other. It's not merely a case of more or less people flying, it's also a case of more, less or different routes being flown out of Waterford. For example, with the Stobart investment in Aer Arann, most flights from Galway and Waterford to London switched from Luton to Southend. This will make a different, at least in the short term, since Luton is a great airport and Southend has only just reopened and has no followon connections. On the other hand, there are now more flights and therefore more flexibility to travel for passengers.

The reason Kerry and Knock are doing well is the ability to handle jets. (Not sure about the runway requirements, but Waterford is not too far off London City footage, but maybe there are other requirements.) This allows them to do, for example, year around flights to the Canary islands. These kinds of routes are nice little earners, and we all currently spend that kind of money on Dublin or Cork airports. I do have a concern about Ryanair coming in, destroying Aer Arann and playing silly buggers with the airport if we get jet facilities, but it looks like a case of grow or die at the moment.

I think Waterford should be able to reach 300-400K passengers per year, even in this climate, if these kind of holiday routes could be added -- which would be possible with a €16m (iirc.) runway extension. This is in line with what Kerry and Derry have achieved, and still less than where Knock are at. Considering the population in the south east, I think this estimate is conservative.

Trotter

merlante wrote: »

I think Waterford should be able to reach 300-400K passengers per year, even in this climate, if these kind of holiday routes could be added -- which would be possible with a €16m (iirc.) runway extension..

Anyone know of a rich old man in America/China/Anywhere who has ancient Waterford roots and a hole burning in his pocket?

16 Million that would potentially change the face of tourism, travel and business in Waterford. When you think of the money thats flogged away in this country its so frustrating.

munchkin_utd

how can a wee strip of tarmac cost 16 million?
Surely it'd be much much lower than that or are there some hidden complications with the houses/ roads either side of the runway?
Heres the airport on Google Maps
http://maps.google.de/maps?q=waterford+airport&ie=UTF8&hl=en&hq=waterford+airport&hnear=Waterford+Airport+(WAT),+Waterford,+County+Waterford,+Ireland&ll=52.186089,-7.09528&spn=0.030784,0.114584&t=h&z=14

and completely tangentally.
If waterford is so strategic to the development of the region, and offers such massive latent opportunity for airlines, would a cash rich airline like Ryanair not want to maybe contribute to the airport and use it as a hub rather than have most of their planes at the DAA ran Dublin and Cork that they give out about so much?

deisedol

I am guessing the government will not support waterford airport on the grounds that waterford have a motorway to Dublin airport now. Waterford is only 1.5 hours from Cork Airport. Also the runway is too short for larger aircraft. Unfortunately with all the cutbacks i doubt waterford airport will be a priority for government now.:(

shanemul

It's not the cost of the tarmac it's the fact it has to be a strenghtened extension. The current section will also need to be widened meaning that all runway lights would have to be replaced. The taxi ways will have to be widened also. All adds up

Silverado

I understand that the runway extension needed is 600m to make a total of 2000m which is what is required for Boeing 737s and Airbus 320s such as those used by Aer Lingus and Ryanair.

The extension was originally quoted at something like €26m which doesn't make much sense. Does anyone know the breakdown of costs involved in the extension? It sounds like a Celtic Tiger land purchase rip off.

merlante

deisedol wrote: »

I am guessing the government will not support waterford airport on the grounds that waterford have a motorway to Dublin airport now. Waterford is only 1.5 hours from Cork Airport. Also the runway is too short for larger aircraft. Unfortunately with all the cutbacks i doubt waterford airport will be a priority for government now.:(

The motorway to Dublin is great, but it still means an overnight, or night driving, for early morning flights.

Incidentally, I usually find the google drive times fairly accurate (if you're staying in the limit):
Waterford city - Cork Airport: 127km, 1hr 51mins.
Waterford city - Dublin Airport: 174km, 1hr 58mins.

So basically, you're talking 2hrs to an international airport, which is great, but Aer Arann, and other airports, has shown that certain flights can be profitable from regional airports. Flights to London for example, or flights to year around holiday destinations, like the Canaries, or a major European hub, like Amsterdam. That is as much as Waterford ever needs.

If you want to fly to London at 7am from Dublin or Cork, you'd have to leave the house at 2hrs (drive) + 2hrs (for security, etc.) = 4hrs early, or 3am. That means you will either stay overnight, or drive through the night, thus going without sleep or wasting part of a day sleeping it off at the other end. From Waterford, it's 0hr drive (10mins?) + 1hr (for security, etc.), so you could leave the house at 6am. A 2hr drive doesn't seem so bad, but when combined with more time at the airport, it makes a big difference. When I have to fly out of Dublin at a time like this I factor in €69 for Bewley's "airport" hotel in to the cost of the flight, which makes a cheaper Aer Lingus/Ryanair flight a lot less attractive.

I think the most we can hope for at the moment is that the subvention is continued for another few years and hopefully either passenger numbers will increase or runway investment can be found in the meantime.

merlante

munchkin_utd wrote: »

how can a wee strip of tarmac cost 16 million?

No idea. But there might be other health and safety, etc., requirements needed as well.

munchkin_utd wrote: »

If waterford is so strategic to the development of the region, and offers such massive latent opportunity for airlines, would a cash rich airline like Ryanair not want to maybe contribute to the airport and use it as a hub rather than have most of their planes at the DAA ran Dublin and Cork that they give out about so much?

Well I think they have reasonably sweet deals in those airports as it is that Waterford might find difficult to compete with. Ryanair can usually strongarm Irish airports into giving them whatever they want. When Shannon wouldn't agree to their demands, they pulled out all or most of their flights, sending passenger numbers plummeting. Waterford wouldn't have a hope of doing a deal with them, whilst they are getting a decent deal to fly into Dublin directly.

O'Leary has said on numerous occasions that he only sees a future for Dublin, Cork, Shannon, Knock and Kerry airports. He'd naturally prefer if the others shut down, so the passengers he is losing to Aer Arann would fly Ryanair out of the airports he is already established in. I think Waterford has the capacity to prove him wrong, incidentally. Given the lack of other regional airports in the triangle from Dublin to Cork to Wexford, there is no reason why Waterford cannot get to where Kerry, Derry or Knock are.

Neworder79

munchkin_utd wrote: »

how can a wee strip of tarmac cost 16 million?

I dont have figures but it's technically a lot more than a wee strip of tarmac and building airports doesn't come cheap. A lot of safety features and technology are required to meet IAA and legal requirements:

- Design, planning & building extended area and associated land purchase
- Runways foundations have to meet a set standard for aircraft weight/force
- The runway is too narrow so the whole existing strip will need widening to 45m
- Surface will be relaid and requires specialist friction finishing
- Turn pads &taxiway upgrades
- Surface painting & signage
- Perimeter fencing, runway inspection roads
- Ducting & tanks are needed to handle runoff
- Piping & electrics for runway lighting, approach lighting & gantries
- Land beyond the extension needed for over-run safety areas
- Upgraded landing guidance systems & monitoring equipment may be included in the cost

Silverado

Its still hard to believe a figure of €16m for a 600 metre runway extension when the Airport Road from Killure to the Airport cost only €8m. The distance from Killure to the Airport at Killowen is about 6km. This roadway also involved numerous C.P.O.s.

fricatus

In light of the above, I presume the airport would need to shut for 6-9 months, or whatever length of time was needed to carry out those works - is this correct?

€16m isn't a lot. They should approach businesses in Waterford, Wexford and Kilkenny, and ask them for the cash, rather than waiting forever for the government to fund it.

fricatus

Silverado wrote: »

Its still hard to believe a figure of €16m for a 600 metre runway extension when the Airport Road from Killure to the Airport cost only €8m. The distance from Killure to the Airport at Killowen is about 6km. This roadway also involved numerous C.P.O.s.

The road doesn't need to be strong enought to handle the weight of a fully laden 737 though... and it doesn't have a whole load of little lights set into it. Nor does it have a landing guidance system attached. These things add up!

merlante

fricatus wrote: »

In light of the above, I presume the airport would need to shut for 6-9 months, or whatever length of time was needed to carry out those works - is this correct?

€16m isn't a lot. They should approach businesses in Waterford, Wexford and Kilkenny, and ask them for the cash, rather than waiting forever for the government to fund it.

You would hope that most of the upgrades could be done either during the 6hrs of airport downtime in the night, or in parallel to airport operation (a lot of electrical work, etc.). Also, even though the spend is significant, it wouldn't necessarily take that long to construct per se. Probably a lot of waiting around for inspectors and experts of one sort or another to give thumbs up for this or that, while existing operations continue.

If they are indeed going to close a few airports but give Waterford a chance, then it might be possible to make the case for a portion of this funding, given the evidence of Kerry, Knock and Derry. Waterford could treble its passenger numbers in a few years as some of those airports did.

That aside, reading through the Department of Transport report in a little bit more detail, it is clear that Waterford's cost base is too high. It is higher than most or all of the other airports per passenger, which indicates that it should be possible to bring costs down without impacting seriously on services. So a cost cutting programme would probably also be part of any future deal for airport funding.

Neworder79

The minister has said in recent days that there isn't even enough in the airports capital budget (CAPEX) for the expected upkeep and safety costs of existing airport infrastructure.

So whatever the chances of continued OPEX support I can't see them funding a new runway, the regional airports part of Transport 21 was effectively shelved by the last Government to cut costs.

Psychedelic

fricatus wrote: »

€16m isn't a lot. They should approach businesses in Waterford, Wexford and Kilkenny, and ask them for the cash, rather than waiting forever for the government to fund it.

The councils in the South East could also contribute. The thing is though councils and businesses are really struggling, and businesses are being asked to support literally dozens of festivals, events, initiatives etc so I don't think you could raise much from them. Same goes for the councils too. Maybe the way to go about it would be to raise €8m over say 3-4 years from councils, busineses and private investors, with the Government providing matching funding of the other €8m.

Bards

how about asking people to donate some money during the Tall Ships Festival??

Circa 500,000 people are expected to attend

If it works, maybe it could be rolled out to other festivals around the S.E?

Musicman2000

Another very important thing being left out, a new terminal building to handle higher passenger numbers, wouldn’t be cheap either

merlante

Musicman2000 wrote: »

Another very important thing being left out, a new terminal building to handle higher passenger numbers, wouldn’t be cheap either

Well, according to wikipedia, 737s seat about twice the number of people as the ATR-72s. So that's no big deal I think, since the terminal building, small as it is, could take the peak numbers you'd expect for the bigger flights. There would also be a higher frequency of flights, but as long as flights are spread out well, it shouldn't be a problem. If the airport were occasionally very busy, I think we'd live with it, given the alternative.

Even if jets could take off and land at the airport, it seems to me that most flights would probably still use the turboprop planes, provided Aer Arann was still there, since they are perfect for UK runs with smaller numbers. You're really only talking jets for holiday flights, where you'd have the volume. Even if we got the Amsterdam route back, turboprop is fine.

savic04

CItyjet would be another airline who can work there as it is.

They use Avro jets 95 seaters,we do a lot of charter work with them during the year and they can be reasonable.

they have Dub to LCY , Aswell as Dublin-Pau and Paris at the moment.

merlante

Looks like Waterford airport should be safe, for now at least: irishtimes.com: 'We're not just a domestic regional airport'

Earlier this week, Minister for Transport and Tourism Leo Varadkar indicated that the sums didn’t look good for Sligo and Galway airports.

In the southeast, Waterford was reported to be in danger, but Varadkar’s department says that it is not.

It looks like the Irish Times heard Sligo and Galway and *assumed* that Waterford was also on the list. This latest example of shoddy journalism with regard to Waterford is all too typical with the so-called national paper of record, which also can't seem to figure out what the hospital in Ardkeen is called.

fricatus

merlante wrote: »

Looks like Waterford airport should be safe, for now at least: irishtimes.com: 'We're not just a domestic regional airport'

That article also refers incorrectly to Galway as "the State’s third-largest population centre", something which I'm sure would cause a lot of surprise in Limerick!

(For those who aren't familiar with Limerick, its city boundary does not take in a number of major suburbs like Caherdavin, Dooradoyle or Castletroy, whereas Galway's takes in the whole city and its suburbs)