Flybe fears nose-in parking costs to be passed on to airlines
Monday 21st February 2011, 2:29PM GMT.
AIRLINE operator Flybe is strongly opposed to a nose-in, push back parking system for aircraft because it fears the hundreds of thousands of pounds it will cost will be passed on to them.
Airport director Colin Le Ray announced last week that the system would be introduced if work to repair the runway gets the go-ahead.
The airport was designed for the parking system, which would see planes parked with their noses close to the terminal building before being towed out backwards by a tug unit, but it was never introduced because airlines were opposed.
Despite airport assurances two years ago saying that it would pay for the introduction of the parking system, Flybe general manager market development Ian Taylor (pictured) said airlines felt there was a real possibility that the recurring costs would be passed on to them.
- Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. See below for subscription details.
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
FLYBE are quoting £200k for each tug which seems an inordinate amount of money for a bit of equipment to drag the odd ATR or Embraer 200 yards – isn’t that the sort of money an international airport would pay? After all, a fully laden Embraer E175 is about 1/10th the weight of a 747.
Report abuse
Looks like an opportunity to create a saving by not introducing this system.
Report abuse
Is this not a function that an international airport would have, and is not essential for a provincial airport such as Guernsey?
Report abuse
Nose in parking.
Total waste of money.
The main “advantage” of this sytstem is where a pier can be placed directly onto the door of an aircraft – so the passengers don’t get wet if its raining.
Won’t work for Dash, ATR’s or the tiddlers. Only the Embraer 175′s (possibly).
The only other “benefit” is you could park more aircraft nose in but that isn’t likely to happen.
No doubt more trained staff to operate the things too.
Another example of the OTT works we’re being spun at the moment.
Shameful.
Report abuse
Here is a point. If the current terminal was built for it, it should be imposed with immediate effect.
It would mean the airport would have more stands available for the same amount of space, which is why other airports use it. Other airports such as just about every one Flybe fly to. Where Flybe Pay for the service.
But no, here in Guernsey they seem to think the tax payer should be paying for it.
I wonder if flybe would offer any money for the replacement runway needed?
Thought not. Sorry flybe, get your hands in your pockets and pay for it, or put the price of the ticket up to cover it, instead of bleating about how much you have to pay for services in Guernsey, which you have to pay for elsewhere. It’s commercial, act commercial.
Report abuse
Button Moon – but do we need it? I quite like the walk to the aircraft. Reminds me that I am in Guernsey.
Why do we need to park more aircraft? Is there actually any demand for increased traffic? I doubt it. The airport seems to work just fine so let’s concentrate on sorting out the runway.
Report abuse
One of the reasons given for needing more stands via push-me-pull-you was to accommodate the early paper and mail planes when a passenger plane had gone technical and blocked the required spaces
Will that really matter now that we might not get a mail or paper plane?
Report abuse
You will still walk to the aircraft.
It does not matter who likes what and who doesn’t, the point here is Flybe want the Taxpayer to pay for it, not their own profits.
It will be passed on to the customer regardless.
If Flybe were serious about saving money, they would use Aurigny for ground handling.
Come to think of it, why do the other airlines insist on having their own handling, and of course, the costs to do so.
They moan about paying for security, about paying for snow clearing, ash, fuel, you name it, they moan.
And that is all it is, moaning. Ignore them, it will go away, Respond to them and the tax payer will end up paying that which should be paid by a profit making company.
Report abuse
Ray – and you still beleive PSD?
Are you seeing the light?
Report abuse
Yes Flybe costs do get passed on don’t they. Lets use credit card charges as an example but lets not just pass them on lets make money our of them as well.
Report abuse
Gilthead
Let’s just hope that something unusual happens today
Our glorious States will actually make A DECISION
Report abuse
Ray – not holding my breath…
I did think the leader/opinion column in yesterday’s Press was sooooo telling.
Report abuse