Doncaster Sheffield Airport to reopen?

[YorkRailFan]

TUI is "keen to return" it seems

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/transport/doncaster-sheffield-airport-budget-airline-tui-keen-to-return-to-re-opened-airport-and-could-be-main

Not surprised, TUI can't keep up with Jet2 at LBA.

 

[HullRailMan]

The electorate in South Yorkshire should have received a leaflet including an election address from each of the 5 candidates. I'd only ever heard of 2, one being the current Mayor, collectively an uninspiring group - not a patch on Andy Burnham and one or two other mayors, but I digress.

Lots were drawn to determine each candidate's position in the leaflet.

1. The Green party, leader of the 14 Greens on Sheffield City Council, cabinet member for Transport & Climate Change and chair for Housing. Features as the first of his 6 priorities BETTER BUSES AND TRAMS - extending the bus and tram network. No mention of aviation or railways.

2.Lib/Dems - seemingly a Barnsley councillor (not stated in the address), 5 photographs with one in front of a railway viaduct, a bus in Barnsley, a police car and the Robin Hood terminal. Wants better public transport, nothing specific written about anything with no trace of railways, trams or the airport

3. Labour, the incumbent Mayor from Sheffield. 10 bullet points, 4 featuring transport. 1 to bring buses under public control, 3 make South Yorkshire Airport City a world leader in sustainable aviation, 6 renew our tram network, 7 pilot free travel on public transport for young people. No mention of railways.

4. Conservative a Doncaster councillor. In his own words the only candidate with a credible plan to support reopening Doncaster Sheffield Airport. Of his 4 priorities No 1 is the airport. Buses and trains get no specific mention beyond making transport accessible - but "not wasting vast amounts of tax-payers cash on the Supertrams". All the way DSA for him.

5. The Social Democratic Party, the country manager of a group of 5 companies employing 350 from 6 different countries, from Mexborough, within the Doncaster area. 8 bullet points No 4 concluding "and plan to RE-OPEN Doncaster Airport ASAP!" No other mention of public transport, bus, tram or train.

2 candidates are from Sheffield, 2 from Doncaster and one from Barnsley, Rotherham not getting a runner in this race.

4 from 5 had to get DSA in somehow. Both from Doncaster clearly see this as the burning issue, particularly so the Tory - a fight against the dominance of Sheffield (where Supertram certainly is eating vast sums of money to benefit relatively few in Sheffield and even fewer in Rotherham). Barnsley acknowledges it exists. The Sheffield incumbent is somewhat evasive. Reading between his other lines the Green from Sheffield must be opposed but daren't say so!

An interesting challenge for local democracy?

If Labour want Doncaster Airport to be “a world leader in sustainable aviation” what could be better than not having any flights at all?

I wonder how many SY residents view the opening of an airport as their number one priority in life.

 

[pug1]

If Labour want Doncaster Airport to be “a world leader in sustainable aviation” what could be better than not having any flights at all?

I wonder how many SY residents view the opening of an airport as their number one priority in life.

Not many is probably the answer. It’s a popular topic in Doncaster where they believe the reason they gained Royal Charter was due to having an airport, which is rubbish. However, when the chips are down I’m certain there are other, more pressing yet far more boring issues at the top of most people’s priorities than being able to fly on holiday from an airport nearby, or at least having the option to. Don’t forget people have always complained that it was more expensive to fly from there (something I have personally found to be a fallacy), so they’ll most likely find the very same problem could be magnified if it reopens.

It’s an expensive project to reopen something based solely on the belief that the previous operator had ulterior motives and/or mismanaged it to decline. Particularly when it’s blatantly incorrect and incredibly unjust on a company that had invested well over £250million of its own cash into it.

Regarding sustainability, yes you are right. I wouldn’t be at all surprised that when the business case is released that there is a load of guff in it about sustainable fuel and even electric aircraft. They know full well neither are anywhere near being used within commercial aviation. The advanced tech park? Well it’s suggested that Peel found nobody was interested in locating themselves on the Finningley estate, hence why they never submitted any proposals for alternative uses of the site.

Peel are the only winners here. They will be getting paid now for a piece of land sitting empty, they will continue to receive that money irrespective of whether the airport is a success or not next time around, and if/when it opens and it again cannot pay its way, they will be able to sell the lot on to build a new town for which there is high demand.

 

[mpthomson]

Not many is probably the answer. It’s a popular topic in Doncaster where they believe the reason they gained Royal Charter was due to having an airport, which is rubbish. However, when the chips are down I’m certain there are other, more pressing yet far more boring issues at the top of most people’s priorities than being able to fly on holiday from an airport nearby, or at least having the option to. Don’t forget people have always complained that it was more expensive to fly from there (something I have personally found to be a fallacy), so they’ll most likely find the very same problem could be magnified if it reopens.

It’s an expensive project to reopen something based solely on the belief that the previous operator had ulterior motives and/or mismanaged it to decline. Particularly when it’s blatantly incorrect and incredibly unjust on a company that had invested well over £250million of its own cash into it.

Regarding sustainability, yes you are right. I wouldn’t be at all surprised that when the business case is released that there is a load of guff in it about sustainable fuel and even electric aircraft. They know full well neither are anywhere near being used within commercial aviation. The advanced tech park? Well it’s suggested that Peel found nobody was interested in locating themselves on the Finningley estate, hence why they never submitted any proposals for alternative uses of the site.

Peel are the only winners here. They will be getting paid now for a piece of land sitting empty, they will continue to receive that money irrespective of whether the airport is a success or not next time around, and if/when it opens and it again cannot pay its way, they will be able to sell the lot on to build a new town for which there is high demand.

Completely agree

 

[BrianW]

Not many is probably the answer. It’s a popular topic in Doncaster where they believe the reason they gained Royal Charter was due to having an airport, which is rubbish. However, when the chips are down I’m certain there are other, more pressing yet far more boring issues at the top of most people’s priorities than being able to fly on holiday from an airport nearby, or at least having the option to. Don’t forget people have always complained that it was more expensive to fly from there (something I have personally found to be a fallacy), so they’ll most likely find the very same problem could be magnified if it reopens.

It’s an expensive project to reopen something based solely on the belief that the previous operator had ulterior motives and/or mismanaged it to decline. Particularly when it’s blatantly incorrect and incredibly unjust on a company that had invested well over £250million of its own cash into it.

Regarding sustainability, yes you are right. I wouldn’t be at all surprised that when the business case is released that there is a load of guff in it about sustainable fuel and even electric aircraft. They know full well neither are anywhere near being used within commercial aviation. The advanced tech park? Well it’s suggested that Peel found nobody was interested in locating themselves on the Finningley estate, hence why they never submitted any proposals for alternative uses of the site.

Peel are the only winners here. They will be getting paid now for a piece of land sitting empty, they will continue to receive that money irrespective of whether the airport is a success or not next time around, and if/when it opens and it again cannot pay its way, they will be able to sell the lot on to build a new town for which there is high demand.

It's very easy spending other people's money- esp if you can claim a 'mandate'. What skills and experience are available to overcome the 'issues' that brought the demise of the previous enterprise? Why should they be expected to succeed, and to sustain that?

Is there 'high demand' for a South Yorks New Town- is this a good location?

 

[pug1]

It's very easy spending other people's money- esp if you can claim a 'mandate'. What skills and experience are available to overcome the 'issues' that brought the demise of the previous enterprise? Why should they be expected to succeed, and to sustain that?

Is there 'high demand' for a South Yorks New Town- is this a good location?

Indeed, and the Mayors of Doncaster and SYMCA use confusing language as to what exactly they’re trying to appoint. Is it an operator who are being paid by CDC to run it? Or is it an investor who will, after the subsidies run out, be expected to foot the bill? Two very different things in my view.

As for demand for a new town, well definitely demand for housing and probably light industry too. Certainly enough to make a lot of money back from it.

 

[Killingworth]

Indeed, and the Mayors of Doncaster and SYMCA use confusing language as to what exactly they’re trying to appoint. Is it an operator who are being paid by CDC to run it? Or is it an investor who will, after the subsidies run out, be expected to foot the bill? Two very different things in my view.

As for demand for a new town, well definitely demand for housing and probably light industry too. Certainly enough to make a lot of money back from it.

In South Yorkshire land to the west of Sheffield and Barnsley runs up against the Peak District National Park and well defended green belt. Land around Doncaster is far easier to build on, especially to the south around the M18 and the airport. Doncaster's relative population weighting within South Yorkshire may be growing.

 

[edwin_m]

In South Yorkshire land to the west of Sheffield and Barnsley runs up against the Peak District National Park and well defended green belt. Land around Doncaster is far easier to build on, especially to the south around the M18 and the airport. Doncaster's relative population weighting within South Yorkshire may be growing.

It's also flatter and easier to build on, flood plains permitting, and Doncaster is generally better connected by rail than Sheffield, with road links probably about equal. The airport site got a new road link, and if it gets turned into a new town it's just possible it could get a new station* (but only on the Lincoln line, so not much in the way of actual trains).

*My speculation, not aware of any such proposal.

 

[pug1]

It's also flatter and easier to build on, flood plains permitting, and Doncaster is generally better connected by rail than Sheffield, with road links probably about equal. The airport site got a new road link, and if it gets turned into a new town it's just possible it could get a new station* (but only on the Lincoln line, so not much in the way of actual trains).

*My speculation, not aware of any such proposal.

Agreed, there were actually plans for an airport railway station on the Lincoln line, which is daft because nobody would ever use it. However, build a load of houses there and suddenly there could be the demand for a stop on the Doncaster-Lincoln services.

Also agree with the above regards Doncaster being the best place for building owing to the flat land and reasonable links to the motorway and rail network.

A lot of people think the FARRRS link road was built for the airport. Phase one wasn’t, it was built purely to unlock the development land east of the M18, phase 2 linked to the airport and new housing estate. Paid for mostly by private sector. Peel are very much a buy by the acre sell by the lot type of business, the airport was a flagship development aimed at being the centre point of a regeneration of the entire Eastern side of Doncaster. Sadly for them the predictions it was not needed became reality in spite of them trying very hard to make it work.

Peel will still be involved in Gateway East, the airport is being leased to the Council now who are apparently paying for it. Peel are making money from it. They cannot lose now.

 

[BrianW]

In South Yorkshire land to the west of Sheffield and Barnsley runs up against the Peak District National Park and well defended green belt. Land around Doncaster is far easier to build on, especially to the south around the M18 and the airport. Doncaster's relative population weighting within South Yorkshire may be growing.

Risk of flooding? Carrs, peat, drains, ... views across the North Sea to Russia?

 

[pug1]

Risk of flooding? Carrs, peat, drains, ... views across the North Sea to Russia?

The airfield is I believe a brownfield site with land surrounding it snapped up for building. Would have no trouble repurposing it for housing, light industry, shops (which are part of the Gateway East proposals!) and office space.

Mayor Ros Jones is obsessed with her ‘beloved’ airport, so on they push. However, when it becomes a costly burden and the cash runs out, they’d not have much of an argument against repurposing the site. Imagine all the extra cash in rates alone!

 

[Bantamzen]

The electorate in South Yorkshire should have received a leaflet including an election address from each of the 5 candidates. I'd only ever heard of 2, one being the current Mayor, collectively an uninspiring group - not a patch on Andy Burnham and one or two other mayors, but I digress.

Lots were drawn to determine each candidate's position in the leaflet.

1. The Green party, leader of the 14 Greens on Sheffield City Council, cabinet member for Transport & Climate Change and chair for Housing. Features as the first of his 6 priorities BETTER BUSES AND TRAMS - extending the bus and tram network. No mention of aviation or railways.

2.Lib/Dems - seemingly a Barnsley councillor (not stated in the address), 5 photographs with one in front of a railway viaduct, a bus in Barnsley, a police car and the Robin Hood terminal. Wants better public transport, nothing specific written about anything with no trace of railways, trams or the airport

3. Labour, the incumbent Mayor from Sheffield. 10 bullet points, 4 featuring transport. 1 to bring buses under public control, 3 make South Yorkshire Airport City a world leader in sustainable aviation, 6 renew our tram network, 7 pilot free travel on public transport for young people. No mention of railways.

4. Conservative a Doncaster councillor. In his own words the only candidate with a credible plan to support reopening Doncaster Sheffield Airport. Of his 4 priorities No 1 is the airport. Buses and trains get no specific mention beyond making transport accessible - but "not wasting vast amounts of tax-payers cash on the Supertrams". All the way DSA for him.

5. The Social Democratic Party, the country manager of a group of 5 companies employing 350 from 6 different countries, from Mexborough, within the Doncaster area. 8 bullet points No 4 concluding "and plan to RE-OPEN Doncaster Airport ASAP!" No other mention of public transport, bus, tram or train.

2 candidates are from Sheffield, 2 from Doncaster and one from Barnsley, Rotherham not getting a runner in this race.

4 from 5 had to get DSA in somehow. Both from Doncaster clearly see this as the burning issue, particularly so the Tory - a fight against the dominance of Sheffield (where Supertram certainly is eating vast sums of money to benefit relatively few in Sheffield and even fewer in Rotherham). Barnsley acknowledges it exists. The Sheffield incumbent is somewhat evasive. Reading between his other lines the Green from Sheffield must be opposed but daren't say so!

An interesting challenge for local democracy?

Interestingly in Sheffield the council has banned any aviation advertising (amongst other types) from all council owned assets. So a Mayor from Sheffield wants to be re-elected in part to get DSA re-opened, but their own city won't allow it to be advertised? Ho-hum!!

Not many is probably the answer. It’s a popular topic in Doncaster where they believe the reason they gained Royal Charter was due to having an airport, which is rubbish. However, when the chips are down I’m certain there are other, more pressing yet far more boring issues at the top of most people’s priorities than being able to fly on holiday from an airport nearby, or at least having the option to. Don’t forget people have always complained that it was more expensive to fly from there (something I have personally found to be a fallacy), so they’ll most likely find the very same problem could be magnified if it reopens.

It sounds very much like the local support is really only from a fairly small number of people, who liked DSA because it was quiet in the departures hall, security etc. Exactly the reason that Peel finally pulled the plug. Airports are not public spaces for people to chill in, they are key revenue earners for the airports and airlines. Quiet airports can only be sustained with very heavy subsidies, and ones heavy enough that should make most councillors balk, although not in Doncaster City Hall yet. They are in for a nasty surprise!

As mentioned above TUI have made some positive noises about it re-opening, but that could simply them wanting a bit more competition for slots to allow them to re-negotiate charges elsewhere.

It’s an expensive project to reopen something based solely on the belief that the previous operator had ulterior motives and/or mismanaged it to decline. Particularly when it’s blatantly incorrect and incredibly unjust on a company that had invested well over £250million of its own cash into it.

Indeed, this idea that Peel opened the airport only to drive it into the ground is ridiculous. Peel tried hard to attract airlines, but the ones that did take the bait just couldn't for the most part fill their craft. And for budget / holiday carriers, filling aircraft is key to their business models with no Business or First Class seats to sell. There are some in the industry that say Peel were advised against it when they first floated the idea, for exactly the reasons that DSA eventually failed, i.e. there was simply not going to be demand within the catchment area.

Regarding sustainability, yes you are right. I wouldn’t be at all surprised that when the business case is released that there is a load of guff in it about sustainable fuel and even electric aircraft. They know full well neither are anywhere near being used within commercial aviation. The advanced tech park? Well it’s suggested that Peel found nobody was interested in locating themselves on the Finningley estate, hence why they never submitted any proposals for alternative uses of the site.

I laughed out loud reading that about DSA becoming a "world leader in sustainable aviation". As you say its going to be a long time before alternative fuel sources will become viable, and even as they come online it will be a while before costs match existing types. Its very much a political statement rather than a business one.