Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Waterford Airport.

24567…71

Comments

  • #52
    michellie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,691 ✭✭✭michellie


    TheQuietFella wrote: »
    And the only two destinations are Manchester & Birmingham & no sign of London or any another European destination!

    If people are serious about an airport for the south east it needs serious thinking about & action.
    It obviously doesn't have the demand by the travelling public who can't be wrong considering the facilities at other airports.

    Currently €250 to fly from Wat' to Man' return from Oct' 17 > 19 while Ryanair is €86.

    That's three times as expensive. Good luck to you if you are willing to pay that!

    I'm actually flying Waterford to Manchester 17th -19th October, we paid €104 pp

    Edit: that's including a checked in bag per person - 15kg I think?


  • #53
    thomasm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,503 ✭✭✭thomasm


    Max Powers wrote: »
    bord failte are planning a similar thing for east of country and they have said we will be part of that, Waterford being a logical start/end point

    Great to hear


  • #54
    TheQuietFella
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭TheQuietFella


    Fate Amenable To Change wrote: »
    With the check in time and 2 hour drive if you've to make Manchester at 9 or 10 I think is the point they were trying to make with a bit of exaggeration thrown in.

    The prices are good for the 30th of Spetember which is 4 weeks ahead and not a busy period. Then you have to pay to park as well plus the 40-50 euro for diesel/petrol. The parking is telling me over 134 euro for a 5 day park at the moment. So you're talking the bones of 200 euro to get there and park nevermind the flight cost which will likely not be on a Monday or Tuesday, 4 weeks ion advance and in a very non-busy date and a non-busy time.

    As far as I remember the London route was shut down even though it was making money due to the issues surrounding Aer Arrann. From a personal perspective I was travelling over and back to London quite a bit the few months before it closed and it the flight was nearly always full.

    Such a blinkered lot!


  • #55
    O Riain
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭O Riain


    Max Powers wrote: »
    bord failte are planning a similar thing for east of country and they have said we will be part of that, Waterford being a logical start/end point

    Considering the West of Ireland is a touristic goldmine, would it not have made more sense to launch the plan for the East first or at least around the same time? As it stands, the main tourist season is now over and we have missed out.


  • #56
    JCX BXC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,227 ✭✭✭✭JCX BXC


    dzilla wrote: »
    ?

    See image attached.


  • #57
    b757
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,370 ✭✭✭b757


    Flew MAN-WAT today, about 80% LF. Paid 45euro 3 weeks ago for the flight.


  • #58
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    Carnacalla wrote: »
    See image attached.

    I did and i am still puzzled why you have posted a random flight on Tuesday in September to me?


  • #59
    JCX BXC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,227 ✭✭✭✭JCX BXC


    dzilla wrote: »
    I did and i am still puzzled why you have posted a random flight on Tuesday in September to me?

    All flights are €9.99

    You said to enjoy driving up to Dublin at 3 or 4 in the morning for your cheap flight, implying that the cheap flights were only in the morning. The image clearly outlines all flights (or alternative flights to the morning) were as cheap as each other.


  • #60
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    Carnacalla wrote: »
    All flights are €9.99

    You said to enjoy driving up to Dublin at 3 or 4 in the morning for your cheap flight, implying that the cheap flights were only in the morning. The image clearly outlines all flights (or alternative flights to the morning) were as cheap as each other.

    The quiet fella and I where specifically speaking about a Friday flight in October. Friday flights will always be more expensive because of the demand. You can't compare a Tuesday flight with a Friday flight.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Plane Fan
    Registered Users Posts: 61 ✭✭Plane Fan


    Do Flybe not see the potential Manchester has?
    In 2012 Aer Arann struggled to get 30 on the flight, this summer Flybe had 60+ on the flight to/from MAN! The route has developed hugely this year. I flew WAT-MAN and MAN-WAT at the start of AUG with 74 and 78 passengers on it respectively. The demand is THERE!

    If we only have one route (BHX) and still no announcement is made by the end of October or thereabouts I don't think we will see London for early 2015.

    With our current runway the only airline that would be our final hope I feel is Stobart Air again, possibly under Flybe, but that's a big ask!

    I really hopethe airport grows next year and MAN returns alongside LON as in my 4 years planespotting at Waterford I have not seen such high loadfactors on BHX and MAN!


  • #62
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    Passenger numbers up 42%

    http://www.flywaterford.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=210&Itemid=159


  • #63
    TheQuietFella
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭TheQuietFella


    dzilla wrote: »
    Passenger numbers up 42%

    http://www.flywaterford.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=210&Itemid=159

    Against what volume of passengers?

    Waterford Airport is 'FINISHED' unless they get the runway extended.
    Which carrier is going to seriously consider using a regional airport that cannot accommodate jet aircraft & they are not going to wait around for the next ten years for us to make up our minds on what we are going to do while we are waiting for something to happen!


  • #64
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    TheQuietFella wrote: »
    Against what volume of passengers?

    Waterford Airport is 'FINISHED' unless they get the runway extended.
    Which carrier is going to seriously consider using a regional airport that cannot accommodate jet aircraft & they are not going to wait around for the next ten years for us to make up our minds on what we are going to do while we are waiting for something to happen!


    Airlines that don't rely solely on Jet Aircraft for the time being. FlyBe, Stobart among others.

    I believe that positive news is around the corner in the next number of months

    Regarding the numbers
    http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/as/aviationstatistics2013/#.VBFpw_ldXUZ

    It is exciting times for the airport I believe.


  • #65
    munchkin_utd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭munchkin_utd


    you dont need jets to shift numbers.
    This from breaking news today, about aer Lingus regional which is a propeller plane only operation :
    More than 900,000 passengers have been flown on the Aer Lingus Regional network since the beginning of the calendar year, an increase of 176,000 (24%) passengers compared to the same period in 2013.
    http://www.breakingnews.ie/business/aer-lingus-regional-announces-further-growth-in-passenger-numbers-641656.html

    In other news, the 3 times a day Aer Lingus Regional connection from Shannon to Manchester with a 50seater plane is being essentially replaced by one Ryanair service a day with a 180seat jet.

    Now, is that a move forward that theres now a jet, but less services to Manchester and less choice of departure time? It arguably isn't.


  • #66
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    munchkin_utd wrote: »
    you dont need jets to shift numbers.
    This from breaking news today, about aer Lingus regional which is a propeller plane only operation :

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/business/aer-lingus-regional-announces-further-growth-in-passenger-numbers-641656.html

    In other news, the 3 times a day Aer Lingus Regional connection from Shannon to Manchester with a 50seater plane is being essentially replaced by one Ryanair service a day with a 180seat jet.

    Now, is that a move forward that theres now a jet, but less services to Manchester and less choice of departure time? It arguably isn't.


    Whilst on holidays the last two years I was moving between a lot of islands and I found myself of the Bombarier q400, same plane as flybe. I find them to have a bit more leg room and comfort that the no frills 737s. Anyway there is quite a shift to these economical and quieter turboprops world wide with Bombarier experience high sales and having to meet a high demand for the turbo prop


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    Also I have noticed that the airport cannot post on facebook any postitive news without a load of retarded comments about a London Route (like these things just don't happen over night) Anyway the airport replied yesterday with some news -

    "Hi everyone, Thank you for all the well wishes and a huge thank you to our customers. with regard to London, we are sure that you are aware that London is always a priority for Waterford Airport and it is a topic which never leaves the table, we continue to work on this. We are currently in planning permission stages for our runway works, which will also help our position."


  • #68
    TheQuietFella
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭TheQuietFella


    We're into the 21st Century & people here are saying we don't need jets!
    Are ye for f**king real people or just slow! Is Flybe or Stobart the limit of your horizons of what you want for Waterford Airport!

    Is it any wonder why we are where today!


  • #69
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    TheQuietFella wrote: »
    We're into the 21st Century & people here are saying we don't need jets!
    Are ye for f**king real people or just slow! Is Flybe or Stobart the limit of your horizons of what you want for Waterford Airport!

    Is it any wonder why we are where today!

    Of course Jets would be welcomed, anything that would be progress and make our City great again is welcomed.

    I think you are maybe taking this a bit out of context, we must make do with what we have which are turboprops for the moment. There is a vision there for the airport that in time will enable jets, as I mentioned previously land has been acquired planning for a runway is in progress but for the moment turboprops are the limits of what we can use. I feel that you are being needlessly negative, Rome was not built in a day and this kind of infrastructure does not happen over night.


  • #70
    TheQuietFella
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭TheQuietFella


    dzilla wrote: »
    Of course Jets would be welcomed, anything that would be progress and make our City great again is welcomed.

    I think you are maybe taking this a bit out of context, we must make do with what we have which are turboprops for the moment. There is a vision there for the airport that in time will enable jets, as I mentioned previously land has been acquired planning for a runway is in progress but for the moment turboprops are the limits of what we can use. I feel that you are being needlessly negative, Rome was not built in a day and this kind of infrastructure does not happen over night.

    I have a vision of being a multi millionaire with a home on Lake Garda with the yacht in tow but it's never going to happen.
    I have a vision that I'm going to play in an AI hurling final & bring back the cup to Waterford but that's not going to happen either.

    A vision is a dream & nothing more & all we've had is dreams & visions in this city/county for too long without the ACTION that's required.

    What will be the largest jet capacity the 'new' runway will cater for out of idle curiosity because by the time we'll act upon it, it will need to be increased in size again so do it now when we have the men & machinery.


  • #71
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    TheQuietFella wrote: »
    I have a vision of being a multi millionaire with a home on Lake Garda with the yacht in tow but it's never going to happen.
    I have a vision that I'm going to play in an AI hurling final & bring back the cup to Waterford but that's not going to happen either.

    A vision is a dream & nothing more & all we've had is dreams & visions in this city/county for too long without the ACTION that's required.

    What will be the largest jet capacity the 'new' runway will cater for out of idle curiosity because by the time we'll act upon it, it will need to be increased in size again so do it now when we have the men & machinery.


    Largest jet capacity will be Medium Size Jets 737 / A320s with capacity restricions I believe.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    b757
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,370 ✭✭✭b757


    E195, BAe 146, CSeries size.


  • #73
    CelticRambler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,890 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    TheQuietFella wrote: »
    We're into the 21st Century & people here are saying we don't need jets!

    ... and you don't think a fast turbo-prop service to ten destinations would be better than a not-any-faster jet service to one?

    This is the 21st Century and today's jets are only now as fuel-efficient per passenger as the propellor aircraft they replaced in the 1960s. In the meantime, the number of routes from smaller airports had got smaller and smaller and smaller.

    So no, we don't need jets for regional airports, we need people to have realistic expectations.


  • #74
    Max Powers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,510 ✭✭✭Max Powers


    TheQuietFella wrote: »

    What will be the largest jet capacity the 'new' runway will cater for out of idle curiosity because by the time we'll act upon it, it will need to be increased in size again so do it now when we have the men & machinery.

    If only we all had your clarity and business/government expertise Quiet Fella, how do you propose this super runway is to be funded. Maybe you should just write to the dept of finance and us slow people saying we dont want a 100m extension we want a 300m one capable of handling those massive new airbuses, easy as that.


  • #75
    savic04
    Registered Users Posts: 602 ✭✭✭savic04


    Didnt it have jet aircraft going to Malaga and Faro few years ago


    Also, City jet operate small jet aircraft that should manage the small runway


    If we build a runway for jets, do you think an airline will suddenly start using it ?

    Those Aer Lingus Regional numbers are up because they have replaced previous jet routes like Cork to Man etc with EI Regional


  • #76
    fricatus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,081 ✭✭✭fricatus


    savic04 wrote: »
    Didnt it have jet aircraft going to Malaga and Faro few years ago

    Yes, they were BAe146s, which comparatively few airlines use. Apparently they're good on shorter runways, but not so good on fuel, which is a big deal in fairness.

    savic04 wrote: »
    Also, City jet operate small jet aircraft that should manage the small runway

    True, but CityJet service the premium business market between major business centres (e.g. Dublin, London City and Paris). I would be very surprised to ever see them at Waterford.

    savic04 wrote: »
    If we build a runway for jets, do you think an airline will suddenly start using it?

    That's not for me to say, but as things stand, the runway is inadequate for the commonest jets in the major airline fleets, the Boeing 737s and the Airbus A319/A320 models. Having the longer runway would mean the ability to cater for these aircraft.

    I gather that the runway length proposed would be very borderline for Ryanair's 737s (as in it could take the aircraft according to manufacturer's specs, but it's below the standard minimum length that the airline insists on); however it would be long enough for EasyJet's A319s.


  • #77
    Musicman2000
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,461 ✭✭✭Musicman2000


    fricatus wrote: »
    Yes, they were BAe146s, which comparatively few airlines use. Apparently they're good on shorter runways, but not so good on fuel, which is a big deal in fairness.




    True, but CityJet service the premium business market between major business centres (e.g. Dublin, London City and Paris). I would be very surprised to ever see them at Waterford.




    That's not for me to say, but as things stand, the runway is inadequate for the commonest jets in the major airline fleets, the Boeing 737s and the Airbus A319/A320 models. Having the longer runway would mean the ability to cater for these aircraft.

    I gather that the runway length proposed would be very borderline for Ryanair's 737s (as in it could take the aircraft according to manufacturer's specs, but it's below the standard minimum length that the airline insists on); however it would be long enough for EasyJet's A319s.

    The problem is Easy Jet don't fly into Ireland and I can't see that changing


  • #78
    savic04
    Registered Users Posts: 602 ✭✭✭savic04


    surely if they extend the runway, they need to do it for 737/a320s etc


    Kinda pointless half arsed


  • #79
    JCX BXC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,227 ✭✭✭✭JCX BXC


    Musicman2000 wrote: »
    The problem is Easy Jet don't fly into Ireland and I can't see that changing

    Waterford could pay to get east jet in, and then Ryanair would step in and easy jet pull out. Then you have fr.


  • #80
    TheQuietFella
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭TheQuietFella


    Max Powers wrote: »
    If only we all had your clarity and business/government expertise Quiet Fella, how do you propose this super runway is to be funded. Maybe you should just write to the dept of finance and us slow people saying we dont want a 100m extension we want a 300m one capable of handling those massive new airbuses, easy as that.

    We have well paid elected public representatives who are more then capable of putting their shoulder to the wheel if they were half arsed about it but trying to divide your time between water companies & other distractions I guess something has to give!


  • #81
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    TheQuietFella wrote: »
    We have well paid elected public representatives who are more then capable of putting their shoulder to the wheel if they were half arsed about it but trying to divide your time between water companies & other distractions I guess something has to give!

    To be honest I have no faith in our public representatives in the South East but that is something I will not get into. I know Deasy broke the news about the runway investment as if he had been the driving force behind it but all the credit is due to the staff at the airport.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    flybeguy
    Registered Users Posts: 1 ✭flybeguy


    Credit due to staff at airport, i'm thinking you mean management there as other staff have absolutely no idea what is going on. For the past year I believe ( i will have to confirm ) the staff have been on week on week off while 5 managers, and I think 4 supervisor's are working every week supervisor's only down a few hours ( again need to confirm this ). Why are they 5 manager's , 4 supervisors for a small number of staff. If people want to save money then i think by cutting management/supervisors might be an idea instead of trying to take everything off the staff that are on week on week off. Not only is it week on week off but they have cut the staff's shift allowance and expect the staff to work for flat rate after rostered hours are up. They hire a guy on big money to run the place and get in flights and nothing has changed since he went there, if that was any other job he would have been sacked long ago. Have other management taking cuts as big as the other staff I would guess not. As for the politicians helping the airport I do believe they want it to work but will not rock the boat and insist on the runway extension because there jobs are too important. The government only give a toss about the 3 main airports so to expect anything from them for the airport is naive to say the least. And before people ask I don't work there I have a good friend that does and this is not a personal dig at any individual out there but if cut's are happening then they should be across the board not aimed at 1 group.


  • #83
    air2000
    Registered Users Posts: 47 ✭air2000


    ..i will have to confirm ... again need to confirm this...

    Why post B*S* without checking first ?

    And before people ask I don't work... yes you do....

    must be a slow morning out there and also have taken you all morning come come up with "Flybeguy" lol, You need to start counting there's not 5 managers or 4 supervisors...

    2000


  • #84
    notharrypotter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭notharrypotter


    flybeguy wrote: »
    Credit due to staff at airport, i'm thinking you mean management there as other staff have absolutely no idea what is going on. For the past year I believe ( i will have to confirm ) the staff have been on week on week off while 5 managers, and I think 4 supervisor's are working every week supervisor's only down a few hours ( again need to confirm this ). Why are they 5 manager's , 4 supervisors for a small number of staff. If people want to save money then i think by cutting management/supervisors might be an idea instead of trying to take everything off the staff that are on week on week off. Not only is it week on week off but they have cut the staff's shift allowance and expect the staff to work for flat rate after rostered hours are up. They hire a guy on big money to run the place and get in flights and nothing has changed since he went there, if that was any other job he would have been sacked long ago. Have other management taking cuts as big as the other staff I would guess not. As for the politicians helping the airport I do believe they want it to work but will not rock the boat and insist on the runway extension because there jobs are too important. The government only give a toss about the 3 main airports so to expect anything from them for the airport is naive to say the least. And before people ask I don't work there I have a good friend that does and this is not a personal dig at any individual out there but if cut's are happening then they should be across the board not aimed at 1 group.

    Galway Airport Staff member rant


  • #85
    wellboytoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭wellboytoo


    flybeguy wrote: »
    Credit due to staff at airport, i'm thinking you mean management there as other staff have absolutely no idea what is going on. For the past year I believe ( i will have to confirm ) the staff have been on week on week off while 5 managers, and I think 4 supervisor's are working every week supervisor's only down a few hours ( again need to confirm this ). Why are they 5 manager's , 4 supervisors for a small number of staff. If people want to save money then i think by cutting management/supervisors might be an idea instead of trying to take everything off the staff that are on week on week off. Not only is it week on week off but they have cut the staff's shift allowance and expect the staff to work for flat rate after rostered hours are up. They hire a guy on big money to run the place and get in flights and nothing has changed since he went there, if that was any other job he would have been sacked long ago. Have other management taking cuts as big as the other staff I would guess not. As for the politicians helping the airport I do believe they want it to work but will not rock the boat and insist on the runway extension because there jobs are too important. The government only give a toss about the 3 main airports so to expect anything from them for the airport is naive to say the least. And before people ask I don't work there I have a good friend that does and this is not a personal dig at any individual out there but if cut's are happening then they should be across the board not aimed at 1 group.

    Another person who thinks the business runs for the staff rather than to make a profit,


  • #86
    TheQuietFella
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭TheQuietFella


    I can't find the newspaper but 42% equates to ten extra passengers a week using the airport!


  • #87
    Teebor15
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 506 ✭✭✭Teebor15


    TheQuietFella wrote: »
    I can't find the newspaper but 42% equates to ten extra passengers a week using the airport!

    I'm always amused at the nonsense that's spouted on these threads. Most of which is so far from reality (See..eh..Flybeguy above)I don't know wether to laugh or cry! I can't be arsed correcting most of these post as your just dealing with gob****es but I'll bite on this one...

    I'll be fair and give TheQuietFella (who isn't really that quite at all!) a chance to find the newspaper and check his figures regarding the above before coming on an either posting the correct figures or else admitting he has made a total balls of it, is way off the mark and was just seeing what he wanted to see in order to have a pop at the airport!


  • #88
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    Teebor15 wrote: »
    I'm always amused at the nonsense that's spouted on these threads. Most of which is so far from reality (See..eh..Flybeguy above)I don't know wether to laugh or cry! I can't be arsed correcting most of these post as your just dealing with gob****es but I'll bite on this one...

    I'll be fair and give TheQuietFella (who isn't really that quite at all!) a chance to check his figures regarding the above before coming on an either posting the correct figures or else admitting he has made a total balls of it, is way off the mark and was just seeing what he wanted to see in order to have a pop at the airport!

    Ditto


  • #89
    Speak Now
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,708 ✭✭✭Speak Now


    TheQuietFella wrote: »
    I can't find the newspaper but 42% equates to ten extra passengers a week using the airport!


    so 34 a week instead of 24, gimmie a break.


  • #90
    b757
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,370 ✭✭✭b757


    WAT-BHX 2588 PAX for August, 92% Load Factor.
    WAT-MAN 1925 PAX for August, 88% Load Factor.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Plane Fan
    Registered Users Posts: 61 ✭✭Plane Fan


    b757 wrote: »
    WAT-BHX 2588 PAX for August, 92% Load Factor.
    WAT-MAN 1925 PAX for August, 88% Load Factor.
    Superb load factors compared to previous years on those routes when RE had them! Shouldn't that be enough to get flybe to operate Manchester next year, I suppose next month will tell when BE launch the S15 Schedule!


  • #92
    Squidvicious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 479 ✭✭Squidvicious


    Plane Fan wrote: »
    Superb load factors compared to previous years on those routes when RE had them! Shouldn't that be enough to get flybe to operate Manchester next year, I suppose next month will tell when BE launch the S15 Schedule!
    How expensive is it to have a "slot" at a busy airport like Manchester or any of the London airports? I reckon that a huge problem for Waterford is that if, say, Aer Lingus has a slot for Waterford to Luton and they can only fly 60 passengers or whatever it is on the flight from Waterford, it makes far more sense for Aer Lingus to switch the slot to, say, the Dublin Luton route. Even if the only have a 70% loading on the Dublin Luton route, they'll make far more out of that slot.

    Now, I am assuming that slots are (a)hard to get at busier airports,(b) expensive and (c) airlines own slots and can "switch" them between routes. However, if I'm right, an airport extension is an absolute necessity for Waterford as airlines will always be tempted to switch slots to bigger airports with bigger planes.


  • #93
    CelticRambler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,890 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    Yes and no. You can have a runway as long as you like and the biggest aircraft possible, but if the catchment population can only sustain flights of 60 passengers on average it will never make sense for an airline to give a hub slot to a regional route. The future for regional airports (especially Waterford) lies in offering routes to destinations that are not major hubs, but that people will go to precisely because they're "boutique" destinations. It works the other way too - Waterford has to promote itself as the best airport in Ireland for high-end/exclusive/special interest groups and stop trying to be Dublin-Lite.


  • #94
    b757
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,370 ✭✭✭b757


    Great bit of business jet activity lately. Significant increase in the last number of months I reckon.


  • #95
    Plane Fan
    Registered Users Posts: 61 ✭✭Plane Fan


    b757 wrote: »
    Great bit of business jet activity lately. Significant increase in the last number of months I reckon.

    Ye quiet a few and a wide range too! Great for the airport !


  • #96
    Teebor15
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 506 ✭✭✭Teebor15


    We all know that getting the passengers services back up to speed are the top priority and the main function of the airport but they are not the be all and end all of ensuring the continuation of direct air access to the South East region.

    The recent business jet activity mentioned above is evidence of just how important the airport is and justifies the relatively small state support the airport (pennies in comparison to some of the state airports) requires to continue providing this access.

    Just for interest some of the recent visitors were Sanofi (parent company) from France to announce major expansion at Genzyme.

    A new regular visitor from Germany who has a company here (I don't know which one, think its in IT)

    Another large group from Germany. I'm only speculating here but I think it might be the new Pharma company rumoured for the city. If it is I wonder was the airport a key selling point?

    Dawn Meats have their own executive aircraft which flies a couple a times a week from Waterford to the UK and Europe.

    And there are many others...

    Another point is the Rescue Helicopter. Since the new helicopters have been introduced to service the number of rescue calls has risen sharply due to its extended range (over 200 miles off shore) and capabilities meaning its attending more incidents like traffic accidents and conducting medivacs (Bringing critical patients from WUH to Cork and Dublin in 20-30 Minutes)

    We all hope the airport can restore the London services asap but lets not forget these other important functions the airport provides to the region.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Chip Whitley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,464 ✭✭✭Chip Whitley


    Did anyone hear Michael O'Leary on Ray D'Arcy this morning? He was asked why Ryanair didn't fly/support Waterford and he (I'm paraphrasing here) said it just wasn't viable. The runway was too short for commercially viable jets, he said we were too close to Cork and Dublin and the motorways in and out were too good so people preferred to fly to Cork and Dublin and drive the rest of the way but that nobody wanted to tell Waterford that.


  • #98
    dzilla
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭dzilla


    Brendão wrote: »
    Did anyone hear Michael O'Leary on Ray D'Arcy this morning? He was asked why Ryanair didn't fly/support Waterford and he (I'm paraphrasing here) said it just wasn't viable. The runway was too short for commercially viable jets, he said we were too close to Cork and Dublin and the motorways in and out were too good so people preferred to fly to Cork and Dublin and drive the rest of the way but that nobody wanted to tell Waterford that.

    Heard that. To be honest I know a lot of people like to play him like a big bad wolf over him saying there was no future for Waterford before. However regarding why he dosen't fly here, taking demographics and motorways out of the equation it is simply that the runway is not capable of landing a Boeing 737 which comprises his whole fleet.


  • #99
    fricatus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,081 ✭✭✭fricatus


    Just to break down his arguments with a couple of counter arguments:
    Brendão wrote: »
    not viable

    It's a non-profit entity. It only has to cover its costs, then it's viable.

    Brendão wrote: »
    runway too short for commercially viable jets

    It's not too short for commercially viable props, but the point is a fair one. One way or another, it needs to be extended so that it can take the jets.

    Brendão wrote: »
    too close to Cork and Dublin

    He really should get out his map. Here are some sample distances between airports:
    Kerry-Cork: 104 km
    Kerry-Shannon: 118 km
    Shannon-Cork: 131 km
    Waterford-Cork: 135 km
    Knock-Shannon: 158 km
    Waterford-Dublin: 188
    Knock-Dublin: 210 km
    Shannon-Dublin: 233 km

    He serves all of those except Waterford. You could make the same arguments for Shannon as he's making for Waterford, yet he flies there...

    Brendão wrote: »
    motorways in and out too good

    The motorway to Dublin is good, but it's still a long way! There's no motorway to Cork either, and in parts the road is quite poor (Killagh/Castlemartyr). It's not an easy drive.

    Brendão wrote: »
    people prefer to fly to Cork and Dublin and drive the rest of the way...

    No they don't! People fly from the closest available airport all things being equal! Who here ever drove to Dublin or Cork for a London flight when they were running three times a day from Waterford?

    Obviously there would be exceptions in the case of needing an early arrival or a specific airport (e.g. connecting onwards out of Heathrow or going to Gatwick for the south coast).

    Brendão wrote: »
    ...nobody wanted to tell Waterford that.

    Hmmm... given the way the rug has been pulled out from under our feet in recent years by government (city council abolished, no support for Waterford Crystal pensions, VEC moved to Wexford, SE hospital group disbanded), I'm surprised they didn't just decide to put another boot in for cost-saving reasons. :mad:


  • #100
    savic04
    Registered Users Posts: 602 ✭✭✭savic04


    Can someone tell me why WAT built a small runway when they were building the airport to begin with

    Was it because of land, money, or planning ?


  • #101
    JCX BXC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,227 ✭✭✭✭JCX BXC


    savic04 wrote: »
    Can someone tell me why WAT built a small runway when they were building the airport to begin with

    Was it because of land, money, or planning ?

    Waterford is not a new airport by any means.
    When opened in the 1980's the airport was envisioned to be a gateway for England from Waterford and was though to never need the capacity for a jet engined plane, of course 30+ years later needs have changed.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement