DOCSLIB.ORG

Hearing Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hearing Statement Hearing Statement Stone Hill Park Ltd. – Matter 10 Economic Development (Policies SP02-SP04 and E01-E03) Issue 7 – Manston Airport Q1. What is the justification for including reference to Manston Airport alongside policies related to the allocation of employment land? Are paragraphs 1.38-1.45 intended to represent supporting text to Policy SP04? The Local Plan does not seek to protect the existing airport use, nor can it lawfully do so, as the Council’s own up-to- date evidence base confirms that “airport operations at Manston are very unlikely to be financially viable in the longer term and almost certainly not possible in the period to 2031” (AviaSolutions Report, paragraph 2.5) the airport is very unlikely to be financially viable in the longer term and almost certainly not over the plan period. This evidence base comprises three separate reports from credible aviation experts AviaSolutions, two of which specifically respond to comments/concerns raised by third parties. This is consistent with the conclusions of our client's own expert aviation consultants, York Aviation (2019) and Altitude Aviation (2019), both of whom conclude that there is little prospect of the re-opening of Manston Airport being a commercially viable proposition over the plan period (see Enclosures 1 and 2 respectively). The Council therefore correctly concludes that there is no evidence which justifies a policy which would safeguard the Site for aviation use and no such policy is proposed as to do so without evidence would be unsound and fail to meet the minimum requirements for a development plan. The Council’s intention is to replace the previous allocation of the former Manston Airport (SP05) with supporting text at paragraphs 1.38 to 1.45 however this is not appropriate or justified. The purpose of the supporting text or “reasoned justification” in the Development Plan is to explain and justify the approach set out in the policies contained in the document. As there is no policy in the document which relates to the former Manston Airport site there can be no policy basis for paragraphs 1.38-1.45. Policy SP04 relates to Manston Business Park, a site adjacent to but not including the former Manston Airport Site. The proposed text cannot therefore justify or support Policy SP04. Q2. What is the status regarding the proposed Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project? How does its timescales align with the Local Plan Examination? A DCO has been accepted and must now be properly scrutinised and examined in accordance with a separate legislative process. The emerging Local Plan cannot ‘prejudice’ whether it is approved or not. Likewise, the Government has confirmed that the Local Plan must proceed and should not be delayed for the DCO process to be concluded. The Regulation 19 version of the emerging Local Plan replaces Draft Policy SP05 (which allocated the former Manston Airport site for mixed use redevelopment including at least 2,500 homes) with supporting text which states the site is not allocated for any specific purpose to ensure that the NSIP-DCO process is not ‘prejudiced’. There has not been a fair analysis of the development alternatives and no reasonable explanation has been given for rejecting Policy SP05. The DCO will be determined through a separate process and must meet all necessary tests under the Planning Act 2008 (as amended), which does not require presumption in favour of the development plan and does not apply s38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 in the same way that planning applications are considered, in order to be granted. The emerging Local Plan cannot ‘prejudice’ whether it is approved or not. Likewise, the Government has confirmed that the Local Plan must proceed and should not be delayed for the DCO process to be concluded. Q3. What are the implications for the Plan should the Development Consent Order be approved? Even if the DCO application is approved, which SHP consider remains unlikely, there is no evidence to suggest that the airport would re-open on any significant scale. As part of the Local Plan evidence base the Council instructed an Heading: SHP Response to Matter 10 independent report on the Commercial Viability of Manston Airport (September 2016) by AviaSolutions (the AviaSolutions Report) (Appendix 8) which considered whether viable airport operations could be re-instated on the former Manston Airport Site and concludes that, even applying assumptions favourable to Manston Airport, “airport operations at Manston are very unlikely to be financially viable in the longer term and almost certainly not possible in the period to 2031” (paragraph 2.5). Following consultation on the Proposed Revisions to the Preferred Options Draft Local Plan, the Council instructed AviaSolutions to review and respond to the representations received concerning the future of the airport site and, in particular, the 2016 AviaSolutions Report. This took the form of the following two reports, which also comprise part of the local plan evidence base: • Review of Azimuth & Northpoint Forecast for Manston Airport (August 2017), which considers the cases put forward for the re-opening of Manston Airport by Azimuth Associates and Northpoint on behalf of RiverOak Strategic Partners, and concludes that neither report puts forward a sufficiently credible case, nor provides the evidence, for AviaSolutions to change its views on the financial viability of Manston Airport; and • Local Plan Representations Final Report (August 2017) by AviaSolutions, which likewise advises that Local Plan Representations do not make a credible case, nor provide the evidence for AviaSolutions’ to change its views on the financial viability of Manston Airport. Based on updated market information since the publication of the 2016 study, they continue to advise that Manston Airport does not represent a financially viable investment opportunity under normal market conditions. This is consistent with the conclusions of our client's own expert aviation consultants, York Aviation (2019) and Altitude Aviation (2019), both of whom conclude that there is little prospect of the re-opening of Manston Airport being a commercially viable proposition over the plan period (see Enclosures 1 and 2 respectively). The overwhelming evidence is that there is no prospect that even should the DCO be granted, the airport would actually be delivered as conceived. The implication of DCO application being granted would therefore be the continued sterilisation and underutilisation of the district’s largest redundant brownfield site, while the District’s housing needs are directed to un-sustainable greenfield locations which have not been demonstrated to be achievable, viable and deliverable over the course of the plan period. Q4. What are the implications for the Plan should the Development Consent Order be refused? Should the Development Consent Order be refused, and SHP’s position is that it will indeed be refused, the Local Plan will have failed to properly plan for development needs in the District, prioritising the allocation of the District’s best agricultural land on sites with insufficient evidence of deliverability, instead of supporting the comprehensive sustainable redevelopment of the District’s largest redundant brownfield site. Q5. If a Local Plan Review is required, is it clear to decision-makers, developers and local communities when this would happen? Is there a clear mechanism to ensure a timely review of the Plan, which currently refers to a ‘minimum’ period of 2 years? Text at paragraph 1.45 states that “in the event that a DCO or CPO process is not accepted or granted, or does not proceed, the Council will need to consider the best use for this site, in the next Local Plan review after a minimum of two years.” Putting to one side that this text has limited (if any) weight as it does not support any proposed development policy, the current wording does not provide sufficient certainty regarding the timing of when a Local Plan review must take place; it could be interpreted as requiring a review within 2 years or after a minimum of 2 years has elapsed. Furthermore, it is inconsistent with the recent direction by the Secretary of State that a review of the Local Plan must take place 6 months after adoption of the local plan (Letter Rt Hon James Brokenshire MP, 28th January 2019). This action is intended to “ensure full and effective coverage of housing provision to give clarity to communities and developers about where homes should be built” (ibid). Q6. Is it clear how a decision-maker would react to a proposal for new development at Manston Airport prior to a review of the Plan? The Local Plan does not seek to protect the existing airport use, nor can it lawfully do so, as the Council’s own up-to- date evidence base confirms that “airport operations at Manston are very unlikely to be financially viable in the longer term and almost certainly not possible in the period to 2031” (AviaSolutions Report, paragraph 2.5) the airport is very unlikely to be financially viable in the longer term and almost certainly not over the plan period. This evidence base comprises three separate reports from credible aviation experts AviaSolutions, two of which specifically respond to comments/concerns raised by third parties. This is consistent with the conclusions of our client's own expert aviation consultants, York Aviation (2019) and Altitude Aviation (2019), both of whom conclude that there is little prospect of the re-opening of Manston Airport being a commercially viable proposition over the plan period (see Date: 19 March 2019 Page: 2 Heading: SHP Response to Matter 10 Enclosures 1 and 2 respectively). The Council therefore correctly concludes that there is no evidence which justifies a policy which would safeguard the Site for aviation use and no such policy is proposed as to do so without evidence would be unsound and fail to meet the minimum requirements for a development plan.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cardiff Airport and Gateway Development Zone SPG 2019
    Vale of Glamorgan Local Development Plan 2011- 2026 Cardiff Airport and Gateway Development Zone Supplementary Planning Guidance Local Cynllun Development Datblygu December 2019 Plan Lleol Vale of Glamorgan Local Development Plan 2011-2026 Cardiff Airport & Gateway Development Zone Supplementary Planning Guidance December 2019 This document is available in other formats upon request e.g. larger font. Please see contact details in Section 9. CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 1 2. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 2 3. Purpose of the Supplementary Planning Guidance .................................................................... 3 4. Status of the Guidance .............................................................................................................. 3 5. Legislative and Planning Policy Context .................................................................................... 4 5.1. National Legislation ............................................................................................................. 4 5.2. National Policy Context ....................................................................................................... 4 5.3. Local Policy Context ............................................................................................................ 5 5.4. Supplementary Planning
    [Show full text]
  • Local Authority & Airport List.Xlsx
    Airport Consultative SASIG Authority Airport(s) of Interest Airport Link Airport Owner(s) and Shareholders Airport Operator C.E.O or M.D. Committee - YES/NO Majority owner: Regional & City Airports, part of Broadland District Council Norwich International Airport https://www.norwichairport.co.uk/ Norwich Airport Ltd Richard Pace, M.D. Yes the Rigby Group (80.1%). Norwich City Cncl and Norfolk Cty Cncl each own a minority interest. London Luton Airport Buckinghamshire County Council London Luton Airport http://www.london-luton.co.uk/ Luton Borough Council (100%). Operations Ltd. (Abertis Nick Barton, C.E.O. Yes 90% Aena 10%) Heathrow Airport Holdings Ltd (formerly BAA):- Ferrovial-25%; Qatar Holding-20%; Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec-12.62%; Govt. of John Holland-Kaye, Heathrow Airport http://www.heathrow.com/ Singapore Investment Corporation-11.2%; Heathrow Airport Ltd Yes C.E.O. Alinda Capital Partners-11.18%; China Investment Corporation-10%; China Investment Corporation-10% Manchester Airports Group plc (M.A.G.):- Manchester City Council-35.5%; 9 Gtr Ken O'Toole, M.D. Cheshire East Council Manchester Airport http://www.manchesterairport.co.uk/ Manchester Airport plc Yes Manchester authorities-29%; IFM Investors- Manchester Airport 35.5% Cornwall Council Cornwall Airport Newquay http://www.newquaycornwallairport.com/ Cornwall Council (100%) Cornwall Airport Ltd Al Titterington, M.D. Yes Lands End Airport http://www.landsendairport.co.uk/ Isles of Scilly Steamship Company (100%) Lands End Airport Ltd Rob Goldsmith, CEO No http://www.scilly.gov.uk/environment- St Marys Airport, Isles of Scilly Duchy of Cornwall (100%) Theo Leisjer, C.E.
    [Show full text]
  • AOA-Summer-2015.Pdf
    THE AIRPORT OPERATORTHE OFFICIAL MAGAZINE OF THE AIRPORT OPERATORS ASSOCIATION DELIVERING A BETTER AIRPORT London Luton Features DELIVERING A A LEAP OF FAITH BETTER LUTON Charlotte Osborn, Chaplain, Chief Executive, Nick Barton Newcastle International SECURITY STANDARDS SMALLER AIRPORTS THE WAY AHEAD The House of Commons Transport Peter Drissell, Director of Select Committee reports SUMMER 2015 Aviation Security, CAA ED ANDERSON Introduction to the Airport Operator THE AIRPORT the proposal that APD be devolved in MARTIJN KOUDIJS PETE COLLINS PETE BARNFIELD MARK GILBERT Scotland. The Scottish Government AIRPORT NEEDS ENGINEERING SYSTEM DESIGN BAGGAGE IT OPERATOR THE OFFICIAL MAGAZINE OF THE AIRPORT OPERATORS ASSOCIATION has made it clear that it will seek GARY MCWILLIAM ALEC GILBERT COLIN MARNANE SERVICE DELIVERY CUSTOMER SOLUTIONS INSTALLATION to halve the APD rate in Scotland. AIRPORT OPERATORS ASSOCIATION Whilst we welcome reductions in the current eye watering levels of APD, Ed Anderson we absolutely insist on a reduction Chairman anywhere in the UK being matched by Darren Caplan the same reduction everywhere else. Chief Executive We will also be campaigning for the Tim Alderslade Government to incentivise the take up Public Affairs & PR Director of sustainable aviation fuels, which is Roger Koukkoullis an I welcome readers to this, an initiative being promoted by the Operations, Safety & Events Director the second of the new look Sustainable Aviation coalition. This Airport Operator magazine. I has the potential to contribute £480 Peter O’Broin C hope you approve of the new format. million to the UK economy by 2030. Policy Manager Sally Grimes Since the last edition we have of We will also be urging real reductions Events & Member Relations Executive course had a General Election.
    [Show full text]
  • World Commerce Review Corporate Aviation Review
    AviationCorporate Review WORLD COMMERCE REVIEW THE NBAA REVIEW PUNCHING ABOVE ITS SIMON WILLIAMS CELEBRatES THE INNOVatION AND WEIGHT. THE MBAA ON THE ISLE OF MAN'S 10TH INVESTMENT HIGHLIGHTED MALta AS AN AVIatION ANNIVERSARY AS A LEADING at EBACE2018 SUccESS STORY AIRCRAFT REGISTRY THE GLOBAL TRADE PLATFORM DETAILS MAKE THE DIFFERENCE. FEEL OUR PASSION FOR PERFECTION. Tel: +356 2137 5973 www.dc-aviation.com.mt For Business Jet Handling: [email protected] For Business Jet Charter: www.worldcommercereview.com [email protected] Foreword elcome to the WCR corporate aviation ePub. www.worldcommercereview.com Our remit is to provide an interactive forum for existing users and new entrants to the sector. W Those who have integrated corporate aviation into their business plan will tell you of the productivity and profit en- hancements it can offer. They will point to the key benefit of flexibility and the ability to quickly rearrange planning and the ability to move key staff at business-critical moments and close the deal quickly and efficiently. Many will point to technologies such as video and telepresence as viable alternatives and whilst these systems are valuable and useful in their own right, they cannot offer the one to one human meetings that corporate aviation can. Many cultures in key markets express a preference for person-to-person meetings and a traditional handshake can seal the deal. In this corporate aviation offers benefits that cannot be matched. We will endeavour to show both shareholders and others with an interest in the company’s well-being in interna- tional markets that corporate aviation can help to drive new business and consolidate markets.
    [Show full text]
  • Opening Statement, Lynne Embleton, CEO, Aer Lingus
    Supplemental Aer Lingus Opening Statement to Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport and Communications Committee – 22nd June 2021 Introduction Thank you for the opportunity to engage - once again - with the Transport and Communications committee. I will assume you have read the Aer Lingus opening statement which was originally due to be delivered on 2nd June. On this basis I won’t read that statement but everything in it still stands. I would however like to briefly supplement it to highlight some specific issues that need to be addressed urgently. Stobart Stobart Air informed Aer Lingus on 11th June that they were ceasing to trade with immediate effect resulting in the cancellation of all Aer Lingus Regional flights operated by Stobart Air. Stobart attributed this decision to the continuing impact of the pandemic which has resulted in almost no flying since March 2020. Aer Lingus stepped in immediately to operate six routes until at least the end of August and arranged for BA City Flyer to operate four of the routes. The provision of this replacement schedule has ensured that all impacted customers due to travel in the immediate term were offered alternative travel arrangements. Aer Lingus also confirmed that we are ready to operate the Dublin / Kerry route, subject to an appropriate PSO arrangement being put in place and that we are actively exploring options that would enable the provision of a Dublin / Donegal service. Aer Lingus and other key stakeholders in the aviation sector have consistently warned that Ireland’s 15-month long implementation of the most restrictive travel policies in Europe without sector specific supports being provided, represented a critical risk to aviation jobs and to connectivity.
    [Show full text]
  • FAC Interface Magazine Cover
    Christmas Edition 2020 interFACe The magazine of the Farnborough Aerospace Consortium In This Issue: Member Spotlight FAC Chief FAC office closure Executive David Barnes interview in FAC Aviation Business News Chairman Sir Beagle Technology Group Page 4 Page 2 Donald Spiers Page 1 FCoT ARIC Ground Breaking The FAC Chairman Donald Spiers attended the ground breaking ceremony for the new Aerospace Research and Innovation Centre at Farnborough College of Technology at the beginning of December and gave this speech: ‘I am delighted to be here today to take part in this ground-breaking ceremony for the new Aerospace Research and Innovation Centre. Aerospace is a very important sector of the UK economy and is supported by a large number of small engineering companies, SMEs, based in the SE of England. The year 2020 has been a difficult year for Aerospace, in both operational and manufacturing, but it will bounce back strongly in 2021 and indeed the signs are already there. One of those signs is this centre, because the future is dependent on new ideas and that requires training young engineers in Research and Innovation to develop those new ideas. FCoT has always been closely involved with the aerospace sector, and indeed Virginia Barrett is a Director of the Farnborough Aerospace Consortium, the trade association for SMEs in the Aerospace sector. The Government also realised the importance of innovation in aerospace some years ago and set up the National Aerospace Technology Exploitation Programme (NATEP) to provide funding for SMEs to develop new ideas. FAC is involved in the administration of this programme and I have no doubt that engineers trained in this new facility will become involved in NATEP in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Night Flights RSP Is Now Suggesting a Scheduled Flight Ban Between 2300 and 0600
    Night Flights RSP is now suggesting a scheduled flight ban between 2300 and 0600. Of course, aviation night is normally 2300 to 0700. Also, cargo flights are predominantly chartered rather than scheduled and so there will be no night time ban on them. RSP is inconsistent in its new Noise Mitigation Plan about what would and would not be allowed. Para 1.4 says it won’t allow night take-offs, but it will allow unscheduled landings at night. Para 1.7 then says “Each landing and take-off at the airport during the Night Time Period is to count towards this annual quota” which means that night take-offs will be allowed. Which is it? RSP is still refusing to cap night ATMs. It says it will probably have 6.7 or 7.7 night flights a night on average. It is not clear to me how this relates to the scheduled night flights that will start at 0600. A few years ago Infratil submitted a night flight application for 7.7 flights a night. Infratil asked for a Quota Count of 1,995 a year. Independent experts Bureau Veritas concluded that the environmental downsides of these 7.7 night flights on average per night outweighed any socio-economic gain for this level of night flights. The public voted overwhelmingly against this proposal. TDC did not approve the proposal. Canterbury did not support the proposal. The RSP proposal is for roughly the same number of night flights (as far as we can tell as there no cap) but for a much higher quota count of 3,028.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue 59 – Summer 2005
    ON COMMERCIAL AVIATION SAFETY SUMMER 2005 ISSUE 59 THE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE ISSN 1355-1523 UNITED KINGDOM FLIGHT1 SAFETY COMMITTEE As Easy As Jeppesen’s EFB provides a flexible, scalable platform to deploy EFB applications and data that will grow 1,2,3 with you as your needs evolve. Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Less paper; increased safety and efficiency; rapid ROI. Jeppesen's EFB makes it as easy as 1, 2, 3. Get more information at: 303.328.4208 (Western Hemisphere) +49 6102 5070 (Eastern Hemisphere) www.jeppesen.com/efb The Official Publication of THE UNITED KINGDOM FLIGHT SAFETY COMMITTEE ISSN: 1355-1523 SUMMER 2005 ON COMMERCIAL AVIATION SAFETY FOCUS is a quarterly subscription journal devoted to the promotion of best practises in contents aviation safety. It includes articles, either original or reprinted from other sources, related Editorial 2 to safety issues throughout all areas of air transport operations. Besides providing information on safety related matters, FOCUS aims to promote debate and improve Chairman’s Column 3 networking within the industry. It must be emphasised that FOCUS is not intended as a substitute for regulatory information or company Air Carrier Liability: EPA study reveals water 4 publications and procedures.. contamination in one aircraft in seven Editorial Office: Ed Paintin The Graham Suite BALPA Peer Intervention Seminar 5 Fairoaks Airport, Chobham, Woking, Surrey. GU24 8HX Tel: 01276-855193 Fax: 01276-855195 e-mail: [email protected] (Almost) Everything you Wanted to Know about RAS 6 Web Site: www.ukfsc.co.uk and RIS but were afraid to ask – A Pilot’s Guide Office Hours: 0900 - 1630 Monday - Friday Advertisement Sales Office: UKFSC What is a Flight Data Monitoring Programme? 8 The Graham Suite, by David Wright Fairoaks Airport, Chobham, Woking, Surrey GU24 8HX Tel: 01276-855193 Fax: 01276-855195 email: [email protected] There are Trainers at the Bottom of our Cowlings! 11 Web Site: www.ukfsc.co.uk by David C.
    [Show full text]
  • London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-Establish Controlled Airspace in the Vicinity of LSA
    London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-establish Controlled Airspace in The Vicinity Of LSA Airspace Change Proposal Management in Confidence London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-establish Controlled Airspace in The Vicinity Of LSA Document information London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-establish Document title Controlled Airspace in The Vicinity Of LSA Authors LSA Airspace Development Team and Cyrrus Ltd London Southend Airport Southend Airport Company Ltd Southend Airport Produced by Southend on Sea Essex SS2 6YF Produced for London Southend Airport X London Southend Airport T: X Contact F: X E: X Version Issue 1.0 Copy Number 1 of 3 Date of release 29 May 2014 Document reference CL-4835-ACP-136 Issue 1.0 Change History Record Change Issue Date Details Reference Draft A Initial draft for comment Draft B Initial comments incorporated – Further reviews Draft C 23 May 2014 Airspace Development Team final comments Final 27 May 2014 Final Review Draft D Issue 1.0 29 May 2014 Initial Issue CL-4835-ACP-136 Issue 1.0 London Southend Airport 1 of 165 Management in Confidence London Southend Airport (LSA) Proposal to Re-establish Controlled Airspace in The Vicinity Of LSA Controlled Copy Distribution Copy Number Ownership 1. UK Civil Aviation Authority – Safety and Airspace Regulation Group 2. London Southend Airport 3. Cyrrus Ltd Document Approval Name and Organisation Position Date signature X London Southend X 27 May 2014 Airport London Southend X X 27 May 2014 Airport London Southend X X 29 May 2014 Airport COPYRIGHT © 2014 Cyrrus Limited This document and the information contained therein is the property Cyrrus Limited.
    [Show full text]
  • Transport Select Committee Inquiry Into Smaller Airports
    Transport Select Committee Inquiry into Smaller Airports The former airport at Manston, Kent This submission is a combined submission from two local community groups - No Night Flights and Manston Pickle. We represent residents who were affected by the operation of the former airport at Manston. Our submission to this Inquiry about smaller UK airports relates wholly to the former airport at Manston. It draws on our research over a number of years into the airport’s economic and environmental impact on the local area. In many ways this is a strange submission to be making. The owner of the Manston site, Ms Ann Gloag, closed the airport on 15th May 2014 because it was losing £10,000 a day and because she saw no prospect of turning it into a commercial success. Ms Gloag has since sold a majority share to a pair of developers fresh from their recent success at the new Discovery Park at Sandwich - the former Pfizer site. They say they have ruled out using the Manston site as an airport. Our long experience of researching the facts around the airport and its impact has taught us that there is a world of difference between the rhetoric of airport operators and local politicians and the demonstrable facts. We want the Select Committee to have access to what we know about the impact of one small regional airport on the local economy and community. No Night Flights Manston Pickle Executive Summary • After 15 years in private hands, the former RAF base at Manston has not been the hoped-for engine of regeneration for Thanet.
    [Show full text]
  • EGNOS Service Provision Yearly Report 2013
    Service Provision Yearly Report (April 2013-March 2014) EGNOS Service Provision ESSP-DRD-11935P Iss. 01-00 Date: 09/07/2014 ESSP SAS, 18 Avenue Edouard Belin, BPI 602 31401 Toulouse Cedex 9 R.C.S. Toulouse 508 275 286 - SIRET 508 275 286 00013 ESSP is organizing on a yearly basis the EGNOS Service Provision Workshop for EGNOS users and stakeholders, the perfect place in order to receive updated information on the EGNOS system and services, implementation information and success stories and to collect feedback from users and interchange ideas and experiences among EGNOS users in different domains. 2014 EGNOS Service Provision Workshop will be held on 7-8 October in the city of Lisbon. Table of Contents 1 A WORD FROM ESSP’S PRESIDENT ....................................................................................................... 7 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 8 2.1 EGNOS SERVICE PERFORMANCE .................................................................................................................. 8 2.2 SERVICE PROVISION AND DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................................ 9 2.3 SYSTEM OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE .................................................................................................... 11 3 SERVICE PERFORMANCES .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Dublin Airport (DUB)
    Dublin Airport (DUB) Summer 2020 (S20) Initial Coordination Report Report Date: Wed 30-Oct-2019 Headlines S20 Init Coord vs. S19 Init Coord vs. S20 Hist (SHL) Total Air Transport Movements (Passenger & Freight) 158,047 -1.9% 6.1% Total Passenger Air Transport Movements 155,587 -1.4% 6.5% Total Passenger Air Transport Movement Seats 27,561,836 0.0% 8.2% Average Seats per Passenger Air Transport Movement 177 1.4% 1.6% Percentage of allocated slots cleared as requested (OK) 90.7% Contents Page Content 2 Runway Scheduling Limits 3 Coordinator's Report 4 Peak Week - Initial Coordination Analysis 5 ATM Allocation by Operator (Full season and Peak Week Comparison) 6 Peak Week - Allocation and Slot Adjustment Distribution by Operator 7 Significant Route Changes 8 Full Season - ATM Analysis 9 Full Season - PATM Seats Analysis 10 Full Season - Terminal Analysis 11 Full Season - Aircraft Size Analysis 12 Full Season - Seasonality 13 Peak Week - Initial Hourly Runway Demand 14 Peak Week - Hourly Runway Allocation 15 Peak Week - Hourly Runway Allocation Comparison (S20 Init Coord vs. S19 Init Coord) 16 Peak Week - Hourly Runway Allocation Comparison (S20 Init Coord vs. S20 Hist (SHL)) 17 Peak Week Histogram - Arrival Passengers (T60/10) - Terminal 1 - All Operators 18 Peak Week Histogram - Arrival Passengers (T60/10) - Terminal 1 - All Operators 19 Peak Week Histogram - Departure Passengers (T60/10) - Terminal 1 - All Operators 20 Peak Week Histogram - Departure Passengers (T60/10) - Terminal 1 - All Operators 21 Peak Week Histogram - Arrival Passengers (T60/10) - Terminal 2 - All Operators (Non-weighted) 22 Peak Week Histogram - Departure Passengers (T60/10) - Terminal 2 - All Operators 23 Glossary S19 scheduling season runs from Sun 31-Mar-2019 to Sat 26-Oct-2019 (210 days).
    [Show full text]