Airlines concerned over new parking system fee
Saturday 25th April 2009, 2:29PM BST.
THE airport has announced plans to introduce ‘nose in, push back’ parking, sparking angry reactions from airlines.
It is expected to cost around £600,000 while work takes place on the runway, but the airlines say the ongoing cost is likely to be footed by passengers after that.
The Public Services Department yesterday released a statement saying the system would be implemented when runway work begins and will involve aeroplanes parking with their noses against the terminal. They will then be pushed backwards by tugs before take off.
The airport will meet the cost of introducing the system during the work, but no decision has been made about who will pay for it after that point.
Airlines have expressed fears that they will end up footing the bill and having to charge customers more.
Flybe general manager of market development Ian Taylor said the airlines had repeatedly asked the States not to introduce nose-in parking over many years.
And Aurigny managing director Malcolm Hart said he was in complete agreement with Flybe in that the service was unnecessary and unwanted.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
What are the extra costs of running this system? Presumablty you need to pay the man driving the tug, but then the current system uses 3 or 4 people to direct passengers on and off the tarmac.
I must say that I quite like the fact that we get out of the plane onto the tarmac – reminds me I have arrived home.
Report abuse
I agree with the airline directors in saying that this service is unnecessary. Plans to introduce ‘nose in’ parking were first considered when the new terminal was built but they were not used. The airport has operated fine without the ‘nose in’ parking and I see no urgent reason to change apart from the fact that passengers have to walk a few extra metres.
Report abuse
The two largest airlines (who usually can’t agree on the colour of grass) are opposed to it and there isn’t a Health and Safety explanation given in the article.
Can someone please explain why this system is being introduced, costing the taxpayer even more money?
Report abuse
Have the airlines thought about the space this will create?? Have they also thought more space, more room, put on more flights? Make extra money?
The system works incredibly well at Jersey airport!!
Report abuse
It’s not difficult is it people? Take the white lines away from North Beach and see how people would park. Effectively that is how the Guernsey Aiport is used by the airlines. Nose in is far more sensible.
As for the 600k per annum. That’s just rhetoric. As TL says a couple of tugs and some baggage handlers with a tug ticket? P
Report abuse
This will only serve to slow traffic movments.
In Jersey they have a finger pier with parking on both sides.
This system will cause bottle necks with aircraft not being able to get of stand while something taxis in.
The system works in jersey sometimes as long as no more than 2 planes want to move at the same time.
Report abuse
now I’ll stay tuned..
Report abuse