Waterford Airport

foxcoverteddy · 08-03-2013 8:51am

There is something wrong, we have been, myself included bemoaning over the attitude of Waterford Airport management, Celtic Rambler say's he has no interest how other airline companies run their operation, he also decry's the lack of response from the people of Waterford.
First of all take the management of Waterford Airport, they have to care, they will carry the can for any failures, peoples livelyhood depend on their expertise.
Flybe is a lifeline, the steady revenue may not appeal to Celtic Rambler, it is easy to suggest such things will lose money, yes and who will take the blame if the operation is not nurtured, Waterford Airport management.
So, how have the people of Waterford been informed of this opportunity? I would suggest that as good as it is the Aviation forum is not the best place, Boards itself is perhaps not the best medium, does it get htrough to the people who can be of assistance to Celtic Rambler?
We know that whilst Waterford might be uniquely placed the fact that the Airport is in Waterford it is also bounded by Kilkenny, Wexford, Tipperary, the county curse comes into play how do you inform of this plan.
Waterford people probably would not read Kilkenny boards and vice versa the same going for the other countiies.
No ones fault it is an inbred factor the same as Mnnster and others in Leinster. No one local media will cross those boundaries.
So before you can say the people of XYZ showed no interest you have got to get to them.
Celtic Rambler has been perhaps rightly so, given very little information regarding the overall business plan, he wants predominately Irish goods, what goods? How packed, do they require refrigeration etc, labelling, if the destination is France,I regret to say they have been known to be somewhat contrite over the lack of French language being used.
From what I understand this is a once a week operation, that in itself is unlikely to keep Waterford Airport solvent.
Has Celtic Rambler produced a business plan for Waterford?
I feel sure if this venture is viable there are plenty of producers in the area who would like to get involved, Celtic Rambler cannot just put out a bland statement and hope people will come flocking, times are too hard for many, they need assurances that there is something viable and from what I see Celtic Rambler has left no contact details etc.
Producers need to talk, 1000kg of anything will cost, what outlets?
It sounds a brilliant idea but before moving you have to let the world know what is what.
Good Luck, Foxy

LeftBase · 08-03-2013 1:28pm

It's worth pointing out that given our road infrastructure in this country you are looking at 30mins max extra journey time from anywhere in the SW to get to Dublin instead of Waterford.

30mins extra is a small price for a better choice of routes, airlines and flight times.

This thread is all getting a little too small town now. Given the size of this island and it's population, 4 international airports(2 offering TA services daily) is an over saturation. It is a simple fact that no airline who will bring any great passenger numbers or route options to Waterford will be interested as they all operate to/from Dublin/Shannon/Cork/Knock anyhow!

Teebor15 · 08-03-2013 2:41pm

It's worth pointing out that given our road infrastructure in this country you are looking at 30mins max extra journey time from anywhere in the SW to get to Dublin instead of Waterford.

Where did you get figures for that statement?

A quick look on AA route planner shows that the main urban areas are all outside your 30 mins.
Waterford (1hr 48mins),
Kilkenny (38mins),
Wexford (1hr 16mins),
Clonmel (1hr 19mins)
Dungarvan (1hr 38min).

It is a simple fact that no airline who will bring any great passenger numbers or route options to Waterford will be interested as they all operate to/from Dublin/Shannon/Cork/Knock anyhow until the facilities are upgraded to accomadate such carriers!

I just fixed that there for ya!

IRLConor · 08-03-2013 3:09pm

air2000 · 08-03-2013 3:48pm

CelticRambler wrote: »

Back in Waterford, when it was announced that "we're talking with other operators ..." I waited for a call. It didn't come. ...

Hi CelticRambler

Im confused by your post, if you are/have an airline with aircraft then whats stopping you starting the routes ? did the venture require a lump sum from Waterford Airport to get thing going ?

2000

LeftBase · 08-03-2013 6:00pm

Teebor15 wrote: »

Where did you get figures for that statement?

A quick look on AA route planner shows that the main urban areas are all outside your 30 mins.
Waterford (1hr 48mins),
Kilkenny (38mins),
Wexford (1hr 16mins),
Clonmel (1hr 19mins)
Dungarvan (1hr 38min).

It is a simple fact that no airline who will bring any great passenger numbers or route options to Waterford will be interested as they all operate to/from Dublin/Shannon/Cork/Knock anyhow until the facilities are upgraded to accomadate such carriers!

I just fixed that there for ya!

As pointed out it is the difference in transit times and the only time it moves too far over 30mins is when you look at places that are then much easier served by Shannon than Waterford.

The bit you "fixed" is just a joke to be honest. Say Waterford upgrades it's facilities then. Ryanair will not operate there because they operate out of Knock, Dublin, Shannon Cork and Kerry and that covers any worthwhile investment(also Ryanair would most likely put Waterford out of business if they were not given a large sum in unmarked bills and a chopper!).The Aer Lingus/Aer Arran Regional franchise. If an Aer Lingus A320 was put on a regular service out of Waterford I would streak across the airfield! Aer Arran Regional would only operate a feeder service to Dublin for the main Aer Lingus network at best I'd say and that is a waste of everyone's time. Only way they would fly to Waterford from anywhere else is if the govt started bribing them to do it again. Flybe have their 2 services to Manchester and Birmingham now, but that is no doubt a niche market experiment to see it it will work for them. Operating from Cork puts them up against Ryanair and Aer Lingus. WizzAir would not go near Waterford because they fly into Cork and only fly to Eastern Europe really. Cityjet only really cater to the business market and that would not work for them in Waterford. The rest are all really Flag Carriers like BA,AF,KLM etc and they would have no interest.

This is not a build it and they will come situation. This is a build it for no reason and they will fly to the other airport that's bigger with better runways, handling agents and safety equipment. In Europe/USA it is considered close to only have to drive 3 hours to an international airport. It is very hard to live more than 3 hours from any of the 4/5 international airports in Ireland.

What is being displayed here is a classic Irish attitude of "the people of the South West will flock to their community airport and support it". However on an Island of 4 million we forget that many airlines operate to cities with well over 4 million people in their metropolitan area alone!(leaving out surrounding countryside). The population of the SW is just too small to justify upgrading the airport for anything more than a Turboprop given that Cork and Shannon are so close.

Dilbert75 · 08-03-2013 6:05pm

Wrt transit times, you can't forget the extra time needed outside of travel - movement from parking to terminal, passage through terminal, etc. When I've travelled through Wat I landed in Sen at about 10am and could have been in London city centre by 11am. To do that I left home 90 mins before flight time, got to the airport in 40 mins, checked in and though security within 5 mins, had a cup of tea, boarded, etc. Then 45 mins train (Iirc) at far side, after a very swift disembark and luggage collection.

In contrast, travel via Dub would require me to be in the airport prob 90 mins before flight, plus 20-30 mins from car park, plus 2 hours & spare for any delays. So I'd probably end up driving up in the middle of the night or staying over the night before to get to London for the same time.

Saving a half hour flight time or a Tenner on the fare doesn't make up for all that.

LeftBase · 08-03-2013 6:24pm

Dilbert75 wrote: »

Wrt transit times, you can't forget the extra time needed outside of travel - movement from parking to terminal, passage through terminal, etc. When I've travelled through Wat I landed in Sen at about 10am and could have been in London city centre by 11am. To do that I left home 90 mins before flight time, got to the airport in 40 mins, checked in and though security within 5 mins, had a cup of tea, boarded, etc. Then 45 mins train (Iirc) at far side, after a very swift disembark and luggage collection.

In contrast, travel via Dub would require me to be in the airport prob 90 mins before flight, plus 20-30 mins from car park, plus 2 hours & spare for any delays. So I'd probably end up driving up in the middle of the night or staying over the night before to get to London for the same time.

Saving a half hour flight time or a Tenner on the fare doesn't make up for all that.

That is true. However airlines care little for YOUR time and money etc. It's about their's. Waterford's runway would need to be lengthened, a new instrument approach procedure put in for larger aircraft(as only Catagory A and B are covered on the current ILS and instrument approaches) and parking bays made bigger/handling equipment bought.

I know we've flogged this dead horse before but it's more likely we'd see Ryanair flying to a newly upgraded Dublin Weston Airport before we'd see Waterford upgraded like that! There'd be more demand anyway!

Dilbert75 · 08-03-2013 8:06pm

This is true but I care about my own time and so should everyone else in the region. If there are flights there we should all make an effort to use them ahead of further away airports. It's in all our interests.

CelticRambler · 09-03-2013 2:53am

Excuse the delayed reply to your various comments, folks. Some days I have to talk to people in real life. :rolleyes:

air2000 wrote: »

Im confused by your post, if you are/have an airline with aircraft then whats stopping you starting the routes ? did the venture require a lump sum from Waterford Airport to get thing going ?

Simple answer: zero positive feedback from anyone in the Waterford area. It's not my job to "keep Waterford airport alive" but it just so happens that it's perfectly positioned, is the right size and has the right kind of catchment area and commercial potential for my business. But my business is about engaging with people, and if the people won't engage with me, well ...

I'm not going to post (much) detail on here because (a) the venture is at a critical stage and I don't want some begrudger undermining it; and (b) this thread is about Waterford airport, not my business.

I reported my first-hand experience to reinforce the point that LeftBase makes: it doesn't matter how long you make the runway nor how big an airline you persuade to land at Waterford, you cannot have a thriving "full service" international airport on that site because Ireland just isn't big enough for yet another one, and if the only thing Waterford people want is quick-and-easy access to low cost, go-when-you-want flights, then you might as well turn off the lights now and save electricity.

As it happens, I'm not convinced that that's the whole story. I believe there are loads of people like Dilbert75 and havetoquit who "do the math" and resent having to trek up to Dublin when there's a perfectly good airport round the corner. I also believe that Waterford is a potentially great gateway to the south-east, and that this really is an area worth visiting and trading with. I'm speaking from a purely commercial perspective - I've got no connections whatsoever with that part of the country.

This disconnection also means that county boundaries mean nothing to me or my target market, so I'll talk to anyone from Wexford, Carlow, Kilkenny or east Cork who thinks they can profit from a regular link through Waterford to (in the first instance) France or western/southern UK - but they've got to come up with the ideas and pitch it to me, not the other way round. Then it'll be worth my while contacting the airport again.

Teebor15 · 09-03-2013 5:11pm

He was talking about the difference in transit times between travelling to Dublin Airport and Waterford Airport.

I know what he was talking about and as i've stated its wrong. So again...using AA route planner
Waterford to DUB = 2.00
Waterford to WAT = 0.12 difference is 1hr 48 not 30min

Kilkenny to DUB = 1.34
Kilkenny to WAT = 0.54 difference is 40 min not 30min

Wexford to DUB = 2.21
Wexford to WAT = 1.05 difference is 1hr 16 not 30min

Clonmel to DUB = 2.20
Clonmel to WAT = 1.01 difference is 1hr 19 not 30min

Dungarvan to DUB = 2.32
Dungarvan to WAT = 0.54 difference is 1hr 38 not 30min

Didnt think i'd need to spell it out for you!

Ryanair will not operate there because they operate out of Knock, Dublin, Shannon Cork and Kerry and that covers any worthwhile investment

I dont understand what this sentence means..do you work for Ryanair?..have you an inside track on these things?

If an Aer Lingus A320 was put on a regular service out of Waterford I would streak across the airfield

A daily middle of the day A320/A319 service to LGW similiar to NOC would not be too unrealistic id say. Why would you streak across the airfield?..though that kinda of action would be in line with your thoughts so far...mad!!

Only way they would fly to Waterford from anywhere else is if the govt started bribing them to do it again. Flybe have their 2 services to Manchester and Birmingham now, but that is no doubt a niche market experiment to see it it will work for them. Operating from Cork puts them up against Ryanair and Aer Lingus. WizzAir would not go near Waterford because they fly into Cork and only fly to Eastern Europe really. Cityjet only really cater to the business market and that would not work for them in Waterford. The rest are all really Flag Carriers like BA,AF,KLM etc and they would have no interest.

I have already said twice in this tread the type of operation that would be in line with similiar airports on this island NOC,KIR and LDY which would bring pax figures up to the 400-450k mark and make any small 10-15 million euro runway ungrade investment money well spent.

This is a build it for no reason and they will fly to the other airport that's bigger with better runways, handling agents and safety equipment

So if the airport was up graded how would other airports have better runways, handling agents and safety equipment?

In Europe/USA it is considered close to only have to drive 3 hours to an international airport

Interested to see a link to back this claim up?

By the way..you keep saying the South West in your posts..do you actually even know where Waterford airport is?

Teebor15 · 09-03-2013 5:31pm

Sorry i didnt realise you had another post spoutin more sh*te!

a new instrument approach procedure put in for larger aircraft(as only Catagory A and B are covered on the current ILS and instrument approaches) and parking bays made bigger/handling equipment bought.

Small money in the grand scheme of things..actually regardless of any runway upgrade i believe the charts are in the process of being upgraded for CAT C approaches at the moment though it may be a few months before they appear.

The Apron at the moment would only require a very small amount of extra concrete to be ICAO compliant with regard safety margins for taxiing and parked aircraft. There is comfortably space for 3 Dash 8s at the moment and believe it or not a B737/A320 is only about 15/20 feet longer and wider.

What extra handling equipment have you in mind?

know we've flogged this dead horse before but it's more likely we'd see Ryanair flying to a newly upgraded Dublin Weston Airport before we'd see Waterford upgraded like that! There'd be more demand anyway

I certainly agree with this statement..in fact i would argue that any Dublin Weston upgrade would have more demand than Cork, Shannon and all the regional airports put together!

But still..your hard work!!

LeftBase · 09-03-2013 9:40pm

Teebor - I lack the time really to address all your points. However you seem to be missing or not understand the base line requirements for an international airport.

The simple fact at the end of the day is that there is nowhere near the demand for a scheduled jet service from Waterford to anywhere. The people of the Southeast(no idea why I kept saying Southwest) may feel that it would be great for "investment and growth" in the region but the big problem with that is that nobody will invest money in it.

Any airline will not shell out to operate half empty aircraft from a small regional airport with a small regional population when they operate from 2/3 other airports within 2 hours of it.

Final point would be the dreaded NIMBY. I cannot see the people of Waterford being too chuffed when a 737 crossed close to the city and over some quiet rural coutryside at 1200 ft or less.

Teebor15 · 09-03-2013 9:57pm

Teebor - I lack the time really to address all your points. However you seem to be missing or not understand the base line requirements for an international airport.

You mean ive called you out on everything..so your factless, baseless arguement no longer has any credibility!

The simple fact at the end of the day is that there is nowhere near the demand for a scheduled jet service from Waterford to anywhere. The people of the Southeast(no idea why I kept saying Southwest) may feel that it would be great for "investment and growth" in the region but the big problem with that is that nobody will invest money in it.

It would be great for investment and growth but its a piece of infrastructure that no private party would invest in because the airport like most airports may never turn a profit itself..may even be lucky to break even but the benefit to the local economy would far outweigh that investment.

Any airline will not shell out to operate half empty aircraft from a small regional airport with a small regional population when they operate from 2/3 other airports within 2 hours of it.

You've spoke to them all already..damn, why did you not say earlier!

Final point would be the dreaded NIMBY. I cannot see the people of Waterford being too chuffed when a 737 crossed close to the city and over some quiet rural coutryside at 1200 ft or less.

Ah come on now..your clutching at straws here!!

Irish Steve · 09-03-2013 10:25pm

LeftBase wrote: »

Final point would be the dreaded NIMBY. I cannot see the people of Waterford being too chuffed when a 737 crossed close to the city and over some quiet rural coutryside at 1200 ft or less.

Some accuracy would help here.

Draw a circle of 3 mile radius off each end of the runway. Draw a line from the runway in line with the runway, and a line 30 degrees either side of the centre line of the runway from the runway ends.

The 2 quadrants inside 3 miles from the airport and 30 degrees either side of the centre line are the ONLY places that will see aircraft below 1200 Ft if they are operating in accordance with normal airline practice, they cross the final approach fix (normally 4 miles) at 1500 Ft, and start descending at approx 325 ft per mile. That's on landing. On departure, they will climb considerably faster, so the area affected by noise from an aircraft below 1200 Ft is even smaller.

foxcoverteddy · 09-03-2013 10:52pm

It all makes interesting reading, the useage factor, distances from a To B etc and now Irish Steve has given a very exact definition of the area affected by noise.
There was originally some possible objection it was thought to the noise of a jet screaming across Waterford.
One day many moons ago I was in Fairford inGloucestershire, buy a loaf of freshly baked bread, when without warning the most incredible sound hit me and everyone else, deafening wasn't the word. I said when it passed what the hell was that, disgusting there should be a law against such noise.
My words were met with a torrent of well meaning retoric about the employment in the area, it was brilliant for Fairford, it got to the point that I wish i had kept my mouth shut,, I grabbed my loaf and scarpered. Ah the noise non other than Concord, they rightly loved it.
Threads to tend to get bogged down, however provided there is a jolly banter it6 is acceptable.
I worry about our friend Celtic Rambler, no one can say he is not enthusiastic, full marks, hopefully he has other lines of communication to encourage people to invest if that is the right word.
However Celtic Rambler shoves in some negativity, I do not understand why, he is trying to achieve something worth while, they will have to come to me. I suppose one could send a PM.
Now what about the plane coming in, one must presume there is a two way exchange of goods etc?
I wish I was young enough to get involved in this adventure but alas life has been good but it has not stopped still.
As a word of advice I think Celtic Rambler you need a PR person to feed information in to the system, it sounds wonderful, don't let it fail for the want of more input.
Please do not knock the people of the South East just wanting a cheap air service to suit them, they are truly lovely people please treat them with the respect they deserve.

LeftBase · 09-03-2013 11:51pm

Teebor15 wrote: »

You mean ive called you out on everything..so your factless, baseless arguement no longer has any credibility!

No that's not what I mean. I mean no matter what I say your small town attitude will not be moved.

It would be great for investment and growth but its a piece of infrastructure that no private party would invest in because the airport like most airports may never turn a profit itself..may even be lucky to break even but the benefit to the local economy would far outweigh that investment.

Infrastructure? You mean like the motorway that links Waterford with Dublin Airport? That is the view any investor in any sort of logistical or transport sectors will take.

You've spoke to them all already..damn, why did you not say earlier!

I work for one of them and am sick of seeing and hearing about their business strategy

Irish Steve wrote: »

The 2 quadrants inside 3 miles from the airport and 30 degrees either side of the centre line are the ONLY places that will see aircraft below 1200 Ft if they are operating in accordance with normal airline practice, they cross the final approach fix (normally 4 miles) at 1500 Ft, and start descending at approx 325 ft per mile. That's on landing. On departure, they will climb considerably faster, so the area affected by noise from an aircraft below 1200 Ft is even smaller.

The current published ILS puts you at 1370' appox at 4 miles. No jet airline will want a procedure that calls for late turns(within 4nm) or level flight at low altitude. They prefer stabilised final approaches where possible where they are not using lots of fuel leveling off all the time.

Anyhow logistics/procedures aside....there is far too little demand and too small a population for Waterford to be any more than it is now.

Teebor15 · 10-03-2013 6:37pm

Infrastructure? You mean like the motorway that links Waterford with Dublin Airport? That is the view any investor in any sort of logistical or transport sectors will take.

Yes!..thats right, the same one that links the south east region to Waterford Airport. The M9 along with the new city bypass and new airport road all make the airport more accessible to its catchment area than ever before...if only they would fund the expansion of the last part of the jigsaw..the actual airport!

I work for one of them and am sick of seeing and hearing about their business strategy

I have no idea what this means!

The current published ILS puts you at 1370' appox at 4 miles. No jet airline will want a procedure that calls for late turns(within 4nm) or level flight at low altitude. They prefer stabilised final approaches where possible where they are not using lots of fuel leveling off all the time.

Is this where we're at now?...ok..you win, your willingness to continue waffling in an area you have a complete lack of knowledge in has finally broken me!

Anyhow logistics/procedures aside....there is far too little demand and too small a population for Waterford to be any more than it is now.

Ok

irishbloke77 · 10-03-2013 9:19pm

Teebor15 wrote: »

Is this where we're at now?...ok..you win, your willingness to continue waffling in an area you have a complete lack of knowledge in has finally broken me!

These facts are correct, what lack of knowledge? Airlines and pilots won't carry out an approach that requires a turn a 4NM from touchdown. Hong Kongs older airport was closed because of this reason, amongst others. However, I am not saying that the public will object to the noise, just that the heights at certain points is correct.

havetoquit · 10-03-2013 9:23pm

Considering some of the recent comments, one wonders that if the airport is not viable, why it was ever built. One assumes that huge projects of this kind are not implemented without lengthy considerations of the pros and cons, the long term viability and so on.

For those quoting driving time to Dublin airport, I ask that you please have some consideration for those of us, who either do not own a car, cannot afford to leave a car at Dublin Airport for 2 weeks, or for whom the option of driving themselves is not practical, unless they are a two car family.

It may also help to realize that not everyone is off on a sun drenched holiday, but either visiting their families or returning to work in either Britain or more far flung areas of Europe. People working in Germany, Holland, France and Scandinavia, visiting family there, our non Nationals visiting home, or those going on business trips, for conferences etc; this group are hardly likely to drive such journeys, so basically the only option is to use the coach/slow train, or depend on family members to pick up and return them to the airport.

As mentioned before, many tourists would visit the South East, were the journey made shorter for them and we should not assume that the South East does not have enough to attract them. There is much natural beauty in our region, not to speak of places of historical and cultural interest. It is not all about lakes and mountains and sailing on the Shannon.

When visiting Germany last year, a friend who used to run a travel agency remarked that several large groups, school tours etc want to visit this region, but used to hesitate/decline, when they realized how far we are from an airport, so they chose the West of Ireland, or take a short trip to Dublin.

One also needs to consider that not everyone who travels abroad are able bodied enough for such lengthy trips, sitting upright in a coach for 3 hrs, 1hr or more more in the airport, the flight and then who knows how much more travel on the other side. Older travelers are fast becoming a huge part of the tourist industry.

if you research the volume of passengers travelling from this region who have to use a taxi and then a coach to get to Dublin airport you will learn that the numbers are quite high. Using a coach from Wexford town, it takes 3 hours to get to Dublin Airport and if you have an early morning flight an overnight stay is often the only option. Without an overnight stay, it can still take a whole day to get to a destination which is basically just a 2-3 hr flight duration. Then there is the joy of no toilets on most of the coaches...fine, if you can go the whole journey without water or some hot beverage from your flask.

We need to accept that everyone will have their own reasons for wanting Waterford Airport to be a viable business, so that it would benefit the communities and bussinesses not only in Waterford, but the whole region.

Take a look around this region at the number of hotels and guesthouses which are not getting near enough business to be profitable. The large groups we could be welcoming from our twinned towns etc etc.

It is obvious that continuing to air our feelings on this board is not going to get the ball rolling, bring explanations or answers, then I guess, we will individually have to show how strongly we really feel and approach those in our particular areas who can help to highlight our concerns and take them on board. There is nothing to be lost by doing so and with optimism a lot could be gained.

I recall an issue of public concern arising in a small corner of Britain a few years ago; every village and hamlet in that region contributed to the publicizing of the issue and local authorities and businesses became involved, which eventually brought forth positive results for all concerned. Perhaps the attitudes were different.... not sure, but it was inspiring to see what strength in numbers can achieve.

tankbarry · 10-03-2013 9:34pm

a flybe embraer 195 would be able to do a good summer route to malaga / palma and maybe another european city and the dash 8 could do the english routes at the moment that is the best option if that could happen that would suit the airport down to the ground. it could work on the runway side of things ie : getting money together for runway , taxiway's , and other stuff it needs.

There is a demand for summer flights and it would help if you could get a reliable service off a decent airline.

b757 · 10-03-2013 10:18pm

tankbarry wrote: »

a flybe embraer 195 would be able to do a good summer route to malaga / palma and maybe another european city and the dash 8 could do the english routes at the moment that is the best option if that could happen that would suit the airport down to the ground. it could work on the runway side of things ie : getting money together for runway , taxiway's , and other stuff it needs.

There is a demand for summer flights and it would help if you could get a reliable service off a decent airline.

The perfect routes for WAT would be;

- London, preferably Luton/Gatwick (12 weekly), Dash 8.
- Edinburgh (4 weekly), Dash 8.
- Amsterdam (4/5 weekly), Dash 8.
- Paris (4 weekly), Dash 8.

All of which Flybe operate into. Use a Dash 8, no need for a upgrade.

A E195 could fit in to WAT technically but would extremely pushing it, the E175 would even be cutting it tight. Hopefully even if the Runway was extended with the current RESA in place and the slight hill at the west side of the runway removed, it could happen. It wouldn't cost a whole lot to strengthen and put a surface on it i suppose.

Obviously I would like all of them to be taken up, but what are the chance's, eh? I'd just be happy to get London back at the moment.

IF, Flybe do expand at WAT, we could be looking at London and Edinburgh. As well as the 2 current flights which will be operating (BHX and MAN).

Also if Cityjet do sort themselves out I could see one or 2 weekly sun flights from them too in the future (Malaga, etc).

--
--

E175 Specs: http://www.embraercommercialjets.com/img//download/137.pdf

E195 Specs: http://www.embraercommercialjets.com/img//download/135.pdf

Don't forget that the thresholds on the either end when looking at the take off distance/landing distance.

RWY - TORA (M) - TODA (M) - ASDA (M) - LDA (M) - Remarks
03 - 1433 - 1433 - 1433 - 1343 - THR 03 DISPLACED 90M
21 - 1433 - 1433 - 1433 - 1290 - THR 21 DISPLACED 143M

Jamie2k9 · 10-03-2013 11:38pm

I could be reading to much into this comment by the airport on the facebook page.

That said, we're delighted with the new Manchester route, Birmingham and the other destinations that Flybe are selling on a connecting basis. If the routes are well supported, we very much hope that increases the case for a new airline base.

To me that says that they are struggling to find a carrier for London service, now I can see why as it requires a base and that costs money etc. So Flybe may still be interested in taking on the route. Think it would be good if BE were the carrier that do it. Anyone any thaughts?

b757 · 10-03-2013 11:50pm

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I could be reading to much into this comment by the airport on the facebook page.

To me that says that they are struggling to find a carrier for London service, now I can see why as it requires a base and that costs money etc. So Flybe may still be interested in taking on the route. Think it would be good if BE were the carrier that do it. Anyone any thaughts?

Sure seems that way. As you pointed out they may be struggling to find an operator willing to base an aircraft. I'm 100% sure they wan't Flybe to do it as they will have the best chance of gaining any type of profit.
Sure, other airlines could be profitable as well; but the Dash 8 is relatively cheap to operate compared to other types, therefore maximum profit for both sides of the deal. Plus, what other carriers out there could operate into WAT, not many I tell you.

Hopefully when Flybe do restructure and fix up the mess that they are in they might consider placing a spare aircraft in WAT. All we need now is people to use both services currently up for sale, therefore increasing PAX numbers, which might help out case for the aircraft being based and LTN/LGW being announced.

questionmark? · 11-03-2013 12:22am

I think the airport has a future but the management have to be clever and get the message out to the people of the south east of how convienant the airport is compared to the misery that is Dublin airport. Getting a carrier to fly to London has to be next step. Think there is also market for Bristol 4 weekly as it covers the southwest of England and is easily accessible to much of Wales as well. Glasgow four weekly has a high chance of being viable as well. Only danger is relying on just one carrier. My two cents as I'm not involved in the industry.

Teebor15 · 11-03-2013 10:02am

These facts are correct, what lack of knowledge?

Yes anyone can read a few figures of an Instrument approach chart. The lack of knowledge i'm refering to is the fact he thinks this may be an issue..talking leveling off at 1200ft and turns at 4nm?..for what..maybe if there was a 5000ft mountain or maybe to avoid the 100 storey skyscrapers in Waterford city...but for noise?..ah come on! Show me an airport in the world that has turns at 4nm for noise abatement? We're talking about a possibly 2/3 B737/A320 flights a day to a small airport set in a rural location..not bloody Hong Kong! My point is..how has it come to this..why are we even discussing this!

Airlines and pilots won't carry out an approach that requires a turn a 4NM from touchdown

Incorrect there are many approaches that require turns after 4nm but this is due to topography..not noise! In fact almost every airport has a circle to land approach which calls for plenty of turns inside 4nm.

Hong Kongs older airport was closed because of this reason

Not quite correct..Kai tak was closure was more to do with the fact it had far outgrown its present site with no room to expand or put in a second runway rather than pilots not wanting a turn inside 4 miles.

irishbloke77 · 11-03-2013 12:18pm

Teebor15 wrote: »

Yes anyone can read a few figures of an Instrument approach chart. The lack of knowledge i'm refering to is the fact he thinks this may be an issue..talking leveling off at 1200ft and turns at 4nm?..for what..maybe if there was a 5000ft mountain or maybe to avoid the 100 storey skyscrapers in Waterford city...but for noise?..ah come on! Show me an airport in the world that has turns at 4nm for noise abatement? We're talking about a possibly 2/3 B737/A320 flights a day to a small airport set in a rural location..not bloody Hong Kong! My point is..how has it come to this..why are we even discussing this!

Incorrect there are many approaches that require turns after 4nm but this is due to topography..not noise! In fact almost every airport has a circle to land approach which calls for plenty of turns inside 4nm.

Not quite correct..Kai tak was closure was more to do with the fact it had far outgrown its present site with no room to expand or put in a second runway rather than pilots not wanting a turn inside 4 miles.

Can it be justified to spend that money if only 2/3 jets will use it? Is that not the point of this?

As for noise, i agree that it shouldnt be an issue, but we all know if it goes to planning authorities to expand, then at least a few people will oppose on noise grounds.

As for published approaches requiring a turn inside 4NM, not many standard approaches are like this. Even worse in bad weather. Either way, a turn shouldnt be needed so all this talk about turns is unnessecary.

I would love to see Waterford develope larger, than go the way of galway airport.

P.S.
An earlier poster mentioned dungarvan as being much closer to waterford than dublin. Since we are talking about routes to london, malaga etc.., would people in Dungarvan not be looking at Cork rather than Dublin?

munchkin_utd · 11-03-2013 1:49pm

LeftBase wrote: »

<snip>

What is being displayed here is a classic Irish attitude of "the people of the South West will flock to their community airport and support it". However on an Island of 4 million we forget that many airlines operate to cities with well over 4 million people in their metropolitan area alone!(leaving out surrounding countryside). The population of the SW is just too small to justify upgrading the airport for anything more than a Turboprop given that Cork and Shannon are so close.

Keeping with the theme of population, heres just a quick afternoon fact to help put the modest size of Waterford city in proportion

Waterford has a population of 46,747 as of 2011 and is fifth largest town in Ireland.

Were Waterford to be in Germany it would be the 206th largest town knocking some place called Gronau off its perch.
Were it to be in France it'd be a little better in the pecking order at 135th knocking a place called Suresnes down a place.
Were it to be in Italy it'd be the 171st largest town pipping Capannori in Tuscany to the title

It is quite interesting to put what we percieve as large population centres in Ireland into international perspective.

LeftBase · 11-03-2013 3:20pm

Teebor15 wrote: »

Yes!..thats right, the same one that links the south east region to Waterford Airport. The M9 along with the new city bypass and new airport road all make the airport more accessible to its catchment area than ever before...if only they would fund the expansion of the last part of the jigsaw..the actual airport!

Your view is so small town that it staggers me to be honest. My point here is why would people travel on the motorway to Waterford when they could travel maybe a little further to Dublin or Shannon and have a wider choice of routes/times/services?
2 core problems with your argument.

1) Unless the people of the SE are all globetrotters anything larger than a TP would be 1/2 - 3/4s empty most days.

2) Any airline operating such jets will not waste the allocated aircraft to the route as they would most likely be able to wave to the other company traffic leaving Dublin, Shannon and Cork

I have no idea what this means!

Airline business strategy? Clearly!

Is this where we're at now?...ok..you win, your willingness to continue waffling in an area you have a complete lack of knowledge in has finally broken me!

Actually it seems it is you who lacks the knowledge as you have failed to actually understand what I said

Teebor15 wrote: »

Yes anyone can read a few figures of an Instrument approach chart. The lack of knowledge i'm refering to is the fact he thinks this may be an issue..talking leveling off at 1200ft and turns at 4nm?..for what..maybe if there was a 5000ft mountain or maybe to avoid the 100 storey skyscrapers in Waterford city...but for noise?..ah come on! Show me an airport in the world that has turns at 4nm for noise abatement? We're talking about a possibly 2/3 B737/A320 flights a day to a small airport set in a rural location..not bloody Hong Kong! My point is..how has it come to this..why are we even discussing this!

Simple logistics that you seem to not know about/care to look at. Airspace for Waterford is fairly ok. 10nm radius zone SFC-5000'. Shannon CTAs FL075 down to 2500'. That's not an issue for jets. However a small issue crops up with the MOA3 which you cannot go around or over if you want to route to Waterford in a jet. Military may clear you through it so then again may not be an issue.

An airline will want a procedure that means they can descend from FL330 right down to 2000 to intercept the ILS without leveling off. That doesn't always happen but that's the dream. If a jet landing in Waterford turned at 4nm to land the people of Waterford would be pulling their hair out. However it wouldn't turn at 4nm and 1200' as that's a bit low and the published ILS calls for 2000' to start the approach. People on the approach path are used to a quiet life with the occasional TP coming over. However they would not be used to the sound of jet engines coming over at approach power with gear down and flaps out.
They would do what all NIMBYs do and start howling on about how the noise affects their sleep and how little Timmy is terrified out of his wits and wont play outside anymore or sleep for fear a 737 will come and get him in the night. The small regional nature or any service would dictate it be an early morning departure and late evening return(annoying the NIMBYs). They'd do what all NIMBYs do and go complaining to their TD who would use it as political fuel to drum up support for re-election by telling Varadkar all about how the peaceful quiet of Waterford is being ruined and polluted by these jets day and night.

I have made my points on how little demand there is but above I am raising the point that often stands in the way of development in Ireland, and that is the opposition of rural communities to it as it changes their way of life.

Incorrect there are many approaches that require turns after 4nm but this is due to topography..not noise! In fact almost every airport has a circle to land approach which calls for plenty of turns inside 4nm.

Unless it cannot be avoided you will rarely see a passenger jet use them.....it's like taking a lighter to you wallet.

Not quite correct..Kai tak was closure was more to do with the fact it had far outgrown its present site with no room to expand or put in a second runway rather than pilots not wanting a turn inside 4 miles.

Also to do with massive safety concerns over the flight path and the disruption it was causing locals. The closure was partly to due with the airport's growth but also to do with the urban growth toward the airport too

fricatus · 11-03-2013 3:38pm

munchkin_utd wrote: »

It is quite interesting to put what we percieve as large population centres in Ireland into international perspective.

All very well, but what does that contribute to the discussion exactly other than as some sort of vague put-down? Nobody in Waterford is arguing for a huge international airport so that we can fly to Dubai and LA from our back yard.

All we're discussing is the feasibility of bringing things up to the level of Knock or Kerry - hardly a stretch! I don't see any reason why the (admittedly limited) population of the Waterford area wouldn't be able to support a similar range of flights as those airports, which serve similarly small populations.

Comparisons like the ones you've made are essentially meaningless, because you're not comparing like with like. Waterford does not claim to be any sort of metropolis, but it is the largest centre of population for 80 miles in every direction, and has the closest airport for about 450,000 people.

By contrast, Suresnes is a suburb of Paris (why it's listed as a town at all is a question in itself). Gronau has bigger neighbours scarcely 15 miles away, Capannori likewise.

Waterford Airport

Comments