Airport

Czarcasm wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

Rickler wrote:

When Plymouth had an Airport, what cities did the flights come and go to?

Apart from London, Maybe Manchester and Glasgow, I can't imagine enough people coming in and out of Plymouth to make routes sustainable?

Air Southwest served the following destinations throughout operations:

City                 Country       IATA ICAO Airport
Aberdeen United   Scotland  ABZ EGPD Aberdeen Airport
Bristol United Kingdom England BRS EGGD Bristol Airport [Base]
Cardiff United Kingdom  Wales CWL EGFF Cardiff Airport
Cork          Ireland ORK EICK Cork Airport
Dublin Ireland DUB EIDW Dublin Airport
Dundee United Kingdom  Scotland DND EGPN Dundee Airport [Seasonal]
Glasgow United Kingdom  Scotland GLA EGPF Glasgow International Airport
Guernsey Guernsey GCI EGJB Guernsey Airport
Jersey Jersey JER EGJJ Jersey Airport
Leeds/Bradford United Kingdom  England LBA EGNM Leeds Bradford International Airport
Manchester  United Kingdom  England MAN EGCC Manchester Airport
Newquay United Kingdom  England NQY EGHQ Newquay Cornwall Airport [Base]
Plymouth United Kingdom  England PLH EGHD Plymouth City Airport [Base]

And it closed because of low demand.

Do you work for SHH, Hugh?

They ran it into the ground to make a killing on the sale of the leasehold land to developers.

I know you believe they can't, but shorely if FlyPlymouth can somehow make it viable for commercial flights to return, that has to be good for Plymouth, yes?

Of course it would be good, but airports are a totally kettle of fish to railways stations. They aren't public services they are commercial hubs wholly reliant on airlines wanting to fly into and out of them. That dictates everything.

Regional airports are having their pips squeezed by the sort of budget airlines that you would expect to use it. You'd have to beg to Ryanair and they'd still tell you piss off. I don't see any reasonable airline that pasengers would want to use, touching Plymouth with a bargepole.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

I've only just seen, for the first time, the development in and around the airport. Are the road names not taking the p**s?  Brymon this, Jetstream that, etc.

There's no way the airport will reopen. It's too close to the new builds now. Add in the noise and pollution, no chance.

SHH have played a blinder. Introduce flights that no one wants to use and then claim passenger numbers are down and therefore not viable. They're not even subtle.

It's not unlike Argyle's race to the bottom. Get in so much debt and then claim the only solution is to sell Home Park. To themselves of course.

The financial crash put paid to that scam but the modus operandi remains.

.

Rollo, a good synopsis and I agree with every word. The one fly in the ointment is if for some reason or other there is a political/mates is mates imperative for the airport to open. Unlikely, but that would trump everything unfortunately.
I don't see the need for an airport myself, unlike some, but no way should SHH cash in on this scam. It's the sort of attempt that goes on everywhere. With the new planning laws and housing imperatives big news at the moment, with central government being able to overrule local councils, PCC will have a hard task keeping these chancers from their honey over the next few years. But, like Brent's bullshit, if you upset the locals enough, you might just find they have a few teeth left, and look to a new bit of skirt.
Whatever happens in the next few years, in 50 years time, it will be a housing development.

Whatever next, Central Park ?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

Rickler wrote:

When Plymouth had an Airport, what cities did the flights come and go to?

Apart from London, Maybe Manchester and Glasgow, I can't imagine enough people coming in and out of Plymouth to make routes sustainable?

Air Southwest served the following destinations throughout operations:

City                 Country       IATA ICAO Airport
Aberdeen United   Scotland  ABZ EGPD Aberdeen Airport
Bristol United Kingdom England BRS EGGD Bristol Airport [Base]
Cardiff United Kingdom  Wales CWL EGFF Cardiff Airport
Cork          Ireland ORK EICK Cork Airport
Dublin Ireland DUB EIDW Dublin Airport
Dundee United Kingdom  Scotland DND EGPN Dundee Airport [Seasonal]
Glasgow United Kingdom  Scotland GLA EGPF Glasgow International Airport
Guernsey Guernsey GCI EGJB Guernsey Airport
Jersey Jersey JER EGJJ Jersey Airport
Leeds/Bradford United Kingdom  England LBA EGNM Leeds Bradford International Airport
Manchester  United Kingdom  England MAN EGCC Manchester Airport
Newquay United Kingdom  England NQY EGHQ Newquay Cornwall Airport [Base]
Plymouth United Kingdom  England PLH EGHD Plymouth City Airport [Base]

And it closed because of low demand.

There was plenty of demand for the London routes but they lost their slots at the the other end.

I'm not convinced that purely commercial economics is always the right measure. In this case it measures not how much Plymouh benefits but how much the airline does.

It may not be commercially viable but that doesn't mean there's no benefit in having it. The trick here is balance the running losses against the benefit, for want of a better word, it brings to the city. If the airport brought in £10m then subsidising it to the tune of, say, £1m (figures plucked out of thin air - I have no idea what they are) would make perfect sense.

Linking in to the global flight network is essential. Imagine how handy it would be to check your luggage in at Roborough and then pick it up again on arrival in NY/Joburg/Sydney/Beijing or wherever. It'd probably even make sense to use it for holidays in the Med.

Internal flights could surely be worked rather like an aerial bus? Fly a loop around the UK: Newquay - Plymouth - Bristol - Manchester/Liverpool - Belfast - Glasgow - Aberdeen - Newcastle - Norwich - Southampton/Bournemouth - Exeter - Newquay? Two planes going in opposite directions? Why not? Too many stops? Cut a few.

One of the things which is bad about living down here is how difficult it is to get nearly anywhere abroad. Not many useful international flights leave "locally"; the ferry service takes ages; the chunnel is so far away it may as well not be there; Eurostar isn't much use to us. Now think how off-putting it must be if you are a foreign investor looking to locate a widget factory somewhere - Plymouth wouldn't even be on the radar, would it?

I'm fairly sure it could be made to work well enough even if it wasn't able to operate profitably.

Lose what slots? London City isn't operating at full capacity hence why Exeter can schedule flights there.

The idea of an aerial bus is absolutely bat shit mental for a number of reasons. All these landings and take offs would use up stupid amounts of fuel and put incredible amounts of stress on the plane. That aside Getting from Plymouth to Manchester for 10am might be useful but who is going to travel from Manchester to Newcastle for 12pm?

The idea of sticking your luggage on a conveyor at Roborough and collecting it at Johannessburg etc is lovely but its always stupidly expensive and relies on the availabilty of connecting onward flights. Its why hardly anyone uses Cardiff. Why bother when you can nip over the bridge and get an easyjet flight at a fraction of the cost.

With Easyjet we are back to operators again. Nobody has come up with any suggestions as to who would want to operate flights in and out of Plymouth and without this the airport is sunk before it starts.

Basically you all want an airport because you think Plymouth should have an airport without any consideration as to how it would be financially viable.

I used Cardiff once, a long time ago. Had my car stolen by the time I got back. The police, who passed by every day, said it disappeared the night before my plane got in. So, for some reason that I could never fathom, they thought I was doing an insurance scam. Charming. I felt like telling them it wasn't insured, just for the hell of it. In fact, it took me 6 months to get my money, having to write to the insurance ombudsman !

There are some things such as the Police, ambulance and fire service that have to be provided regardless of commercial considerations. IMO railways and airports fall into the same category.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

Rickler wrote:

When Plymouth had an Airport, what cities did the flights come and go to?

Apart from London, Maybe Manchester and Glasgow, I can't imagine enough people coming in and out of Plymouth to make routes sustainable?

Air Southwest served the following destinations throughout operations:

City                 Country       IATA ICAO Airport
Aberdeen United   Scotland  ABZ EGPD Aberdeen Airport
Bristol United Kingdom England BRS EGGD Bristol Airport [Base]
Cardiff United Kingdom  Wales CWL EGFF Cardiff Airport
Cork          Ireland ORK EICK Cork Airport
Dublin Ireland DUB EIDW Dublin Airport
Dundee United Kingdom  Scotland DND EGPN Dundee Airport [Seasonal]
Glasgow United Kingdom  Scotland GLA EGPF Glasgow International Airport
Guernsey Guernsey GCI EGJB Guernsey Airport
Jersey Jersey JER EGJJ Jersey Airport
Leeds/Bradford United Kingdom  England LBA EGNM Leeds Bradford International Airport
Manchester  United Kingdom  England MAN EGCC Manchester Airport
Newquay United Kingdom  England NQY EGHQ Newquay Cornwall Airport [Base]
Plymouth United Kingdom  England PLH EGHD Plymouth City Airport [Base]

And it closed because of low demand.

There was plenty of demand for the London routes but they lost their slots at the the other end.

I'm not convinced that purely commercial economics is always the right measure. In this case it measures not how much Plymouh benefits but how much the airline does.

It may not be commercially viable but that doesn't mean there's no benefit in having it. The trick here is balance the running losses against the benefit, for want of a better word, it brings to the city. If the airport brought in £10m then subsidising it to the tune of, say, £1m (figures plucked out of thin air - I have no idea what they are) would make perfect sense.

Linking in to the global flight network is essential. Imagine how handy it would be to check your luggage in at Roborough and then pick it up again on arrival in NY/Joburg/Sydney/Beijing or wherever. It'd probably even make sense to use it for holidays in the Med.

Internal flights could surely be worked rather like an aerial bus? Fly a loop around the UK: Newquay - Plymouth - Bristol - Manchester/Liverpool - Belfast - Glasgow - Aberdeen - Newcastle - Norwich - Southampton/Bournemouth - Exeter - Newquay? Two planes going in opposite directions? Why not? Too many stops? Cut a few.

One of the things which is bad about living down here is how difficult it is to get nearly anywhere abroad. Not many useful international flights leave "locally"; the ferry service takes ages; the chunnel is so far away it may as well not be there; Eurostar isn't much use to us. Now think how off-putting it must be if you are a foreign investor looking to locate a widget factory somewhere - Plymouth wouldn't even be on the radar, would it?

I'm fairly sure it could be made to work well enough even if it wasn't able to operate profitably.

Lose what slots? London City isn't operating at full capacity hence why Exeter can schedule flights there.

The idea of an aerial bus is absolutely bat shit mental for a number of reasons. All these landings and take offs would use up stupid amounts of fuel and put incredible amounts of stress on the plane. That aside Getting from Plymouth to Manchester for 10am might be useful but who is going to travel from Manchester to Newcastle for 12pm?

The idea of sticking your luggage on a conveyor at Roborough and collecting it at Johannessburg etc is lovely but its always stupidly expensive and relies on the availabilty of connecting onward flights. Its why hardly anyone uses Cardiff. Why bother when you can nip over the bridge and get an easyjet flight at a fraction of the cost.

With Easyjet we are back to operators again. Nobody has come up with any suggestions as to who would want to operate flights in and out of Plymouth and without this the airport is sunk before it starts.

Basically you all want an airport because you think Plymouth should have an airport without any consideration as to how it would be financially viable.

Yes. That last sentence is about right.

We spend far too much time worrying about cost as opposed to value - the two things are not the same.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

Rickler wrote:

When Plymouth had an Airport, what cities did the flights come and go to?

Apart from London, Maybe Manchester and Glasgow, I can't imagine enough people coming in and out of Plymouth to make routes sustainable?

Air Southwest served the following destinations throughout operations:

City                 Country       IATA ICAO Airport
Aberdeen United   Scotland  ABZ EGPD Aberdeen Airport
Bristol United Kingdom England BRS EGGD Bristol Airport [Base]
Cardiff United Kingdom  Wales CWL EGFF Cardiff Airport
Cork          Ireland ORK EICK Cork Airport
Dublin Ireland DUB EIDW Dublin Airport
Dundee United Kingdom  Scotland DND EGPN Dundee Airport [Seasonal]
Glasgow United Kingdom  Scotland GLA EGPF Glasgow International Airport
Guernsey Guernsey GCI EGJB Guernsey Airport
Jersey Jersey JER EGJJ Jersey Airport
Leeds/Bradford United Kingdom  England LBA EGNM Leeds Bradford International Airport
Manchester  United Kingdom  England MAN EGCC Manchester Airport
Newquay United Kingdom  England NQY EGHQ Newquay Cornwall Airport [Base]
Plymouth United Kingdom  England PLH EGHD Plymouth City Airport [Base]

And it closed because of low demand.

There was plenty of demand for the London routes but they lost their slots at the the other end.

I'm not convinced that purely commercial economics is always the right measure. In this case it measures not how much Plymouh benefits but how much the airline does.

It may not be commercially viable but that doesn't mean there's no benefit in having it. The trick here is balance the running losses against the benefit, for want of a better word, it brings to the city. If the airport brought in £10m then subsidising it to the tune of, say, £1m (figures plucked out of thin air - I have no idea what they are) would make perfect sense.

Linking in to the global flight network is essential. Imagine how handy it would be to check your luggage in at Roborough and then pick it up again on arrival in NY/Joburg/Sydney/Beijing or wherever. It'd probably even make sense to use it for holidays in the Med.

Internal flights could surely be worked rather like an aerial bus? Fly a loop around the UK: Newquay - Plymouth - Bristol - Manchester/Liverpool - Belfast - Glasgow - Aberdeen - Newcastle - Norwich - Southampton/Bournemouth - Exeter - Newquay? Two planes going in opposite directions? Why not? Too many stops? Cut a few.

One of the things which is bad about living down here is how difficult it is to get nearly anywhere abroad. Not many useful international flights leave "locally"; the ferry service takes ages; the chunnel is so far away it may as well not be there; Eurostar isn't much use to us. Now think how off-putting it must be if you are a foreign investor looking to locate a widget factory somewhere - Plymouth wouldn't even be on the radar, would it?

I'm fairly sure it could be made to work well enough even if it wasn't able to operate profitably.

Lose what slots? London City isn't operating at full capacity hence why Exeter can schedule flights there.

The idea of an aerial bus is absolutely bat shit mental for a number of reasons. All these landings and take offs would use up stupid amounts of fuel and put incredible amounts of stress on the plane. That aside Getting from Plymouth to Manchester for 10am might be useful but who is going to travel from Manchester to Newcastle for 12pm?

The idea of sticking your luggage on a conveyor at Roborough and collecting it at Johannessburg etc is lovely but its always stupidly expensive and relies on the availabilty of connecting onward flights. Its why hardly anyone uses Cardiff. Why bother when you can nip over the bridge and get an easyjet flight at a fraction of the cost.

With Easyjet we are back to operators again. Nobody has come up with any suggestions as to who would want to operate flights in and out of Plymouth and without this the airport is sunk before it starts.

Basically you all want an airport because you think Plymouth should have an airport without any consideration as to how it would be financially viable.

Yes. That last sentence is about right.

We spend far too much time worrying about cost as opposed to value - the two things are not the same.

Well said Jeremy Frank, spend, spend, spend..........the people demand it!

Not necessarily.

Like I said before if the airport brings £10m into the city but loses £1m along the way then there's a strong case to be made for funding the shortfall.

If it brought in £1m but cost £10m then it'd be crazy to do so.

And somewhere along the way the balance shifts from one case to the other.

We all need services; if they are not commercially viable the need for them does not go away.

Fair points, but I would suggest that an airport is more of a luxury than a necessary service.

Topically, Easyjet summer 2016 flights were released a few hours ago, if anyone's interested. (The bargains are all gone by now, mind)

Franny makes a valid point though regarding the greater economy benefits. The Theatre and Pavilions are subsidised for the greater good. I can't think of too many more worthy recipients of subsidy than a functioning airport.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Not necessarily.

Like I said before if the airport brings £10m into the city but loses £1m along the way then there's a strong case to be made for funding the shortfall.

If it brought in £1m but cost £10m then it'd be crazy to do so.

And somewhere along the way the balance shifts from one case to the other.

We all need services; if they are not commercially viable the need for them does not go away.

An airport isn't the same as the NHS far from it, its a want rather than a need.

There's a fundamental lack of understanding as to how they work, they need airlines to fly in and out of them, I haven't seen any queuing up to use it, which is why it closed. Regional Airports across Europe are failing. Examples are Cardiff and Newquay both of which are failing and rely on Government to buy the airport in the first instance and in the second instance subsidise Easyjet to use it. If someone is going to do that to Plymouth, great but who?

Les Miserable wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

Rickler wrote:

When Plymouth had an Airport, what cities did the flights come and go to?

Apart from London, Maybe Manchester and Glasgow, I can't imagine enough people coming in and out of Plymouth to make routes sustainable?

Air Southwest served the following destinations throughout operations:

City                 Country       IATA ICAO Airport
Aberdeen United   Scotland  ABZ EGPD Aberdeen Airport
Bristol United Kingdom England BRS EGGD Bristol Airport [Base]
Cardiff United Kingdom  Wales CWL EGFF Cardiff Airport
Cork          Ireland ORK EICK Cork Airport
Dublin Ireland DUB EIDW Dublin Airport
Dundee United Kingdom  Scotland DND EGPN Dundee Airport [Seasonal]
Glasgow United Kingdom  Scotland GLA EGPF Glasgow International Airport
Guernsey Guernsey GCI EGJB Guernsey Airport
Jersey Jersey JER EGJJ Jersey Airport
Leeds/Bradford United Kingdom  England LBA EGNM Leeds Bradford International Airport
Manchester  United Kingdom  England MAN EGCC Manchester Airport
Newquay United Kingdom  England NQY EGHQ Newquay Cornwall Airport [Base]
Plymouth United Kingdom  England PLH EGHD Plymouth City Airport [Base]

And it closed because of low demand.

There was plenty of demand for the London routes but they lost their slots at the the other end.

I'm not convinced that purely commercial economics is always the right measure. In this case it measures not how much Plymouh benefits but how much the airline does.

It may not be commercially viable but that doesn't mean there's no benefit in having it. The trick here is balance the running losses against the benefit, for want of a better word, it brings to the city. If the airport brought in £10m then subsidising it to the tune of, say, £1m (figures plucked out of thin air - I have no idea what they are) would make perfect sense.

Linking in to the global flight network is essential. Imagine how handy it would be to check your luggage in at Roborough and then pick it up again on arrival in NY/Joburg/Sydney/Beijing or wherever. It'd probably even make sense to use it for holidays in the Med.

Internal flights could surely be worked rather like an aerial bus? Fly a loop around the UK: Newquay - Plymouth - Bristol - Manchester/Liverpool - Belfast - Glasgow - Aberdeen - Newcastle - Norwich - Southampton/Bournemouth - Exeter - Newquay? Two planes going in opposite directions? Why not? Too many stops? Cut a few.

One of the things which is bad about living down here is how difficult it is to get nearly anywhere abroad. Not many useful international flights leave "locally"; the ferry service takes ages; the chunnel is so far away it may as well not be there; Eurostar isn't much use to us. Now think how off-putting it must be if you are a foreign investor looking to locate a widget factory somewhere - Plymouth wouldn't even be on the radar, would it?

I'm fairly sure it could be made to work well enough even if it wasn't able to operate profitably.

Lose what slots? London City isn't operating at full capacity hence why Exeter can schedule flights there.

The idea of an aerial bus is absolutely bat shit mental for a number of reasons. All these landings and take offs would use up stupid amounts of fuel and put incredible amounts of stress on the plane. That aside Getting from Plymouth to Manchester for 10am might be useful but who is going to travel from Manchester to Newcastle for 12pm?

The idea of sticking your luggage on a conveyor at Roborough and collecting it at Johannessburg etc is lovely but its always stupidly expensive and relies on the availabilty of connecting onward flights. Its why hardly anyone uses Cardiff. Why bother when you can nip over the bridge and get an easyjet flight at a fraction of the cost.

With Easyjet we are back to operators again. Nobody has come up with any suggestions as to who would want to operate flights in and out of Plymouth and without this the airport is sunk before it starts.

Basically you all want an airport because you think Plymouth should have an airport without any consideration as to how it would be financially viable.

Yes. That last sentence is about right.

We spend far too much time worrying about cost as opposed to value - the two things are not the same.

Well said Jeremy Frank, spend, spend, spend..........the people demand it!

Somebody better tell this Guy, George Osborne has added more to the National Debt in 5 years than every Labour Government combined!

Hugh Watt wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Not necessarily.

Like I said before if the airport brings £10m into the city but loses £1m along the way then there's a strong case to be made for funding the shortfall.

If it brought in £1m but cost £10m then it'd be crazy to do so.

And somewhere along the way the balance shifts from one case to the other.

We all need services; if they are not commercially viable the need for them does not go away.

An airport isn't the same as the NHS far from it, its a want rather than a need.

There's a fundamental lack of understanding as to how they work, they need airlines to fly in and out of them, I haven't seen any queuing up to use it, which is why it closed. Regional Airports across Europe are failing. Examples are Cardiff and Newquay both of which are failing and rely on Government to buy the airport in the first instance and in the second instance subsidise Easyjet to use it. If someone is going to do that to Plymouth, great but who?

Well that's pretty much the whole point of FlyPlymouth. Their objective is to try and find out just that.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Yes. That last sentence is about right.

We spend far too much time worrying about cost as opposed to value - the two things are not the same.

Well said Jeremy Frank, spend, spend, spend..........the people demand it!

Somebody better tell this Guy, George Osborne has added more to the National Debt in 5 years than every Labour Government combined!

This guy reckons he's probably trying to rectify the clusterfcuk he inherited from the previous shower.

Les Miserable wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Yes. That last sentence is about right.

We spend far too much time worrying about cost as opposed to value - the two things are not the same.

Well said Jeremy Frank, spend, spend, spend..........the people demand it!

Somebody better tell this Guy, George Osborne has added more to the National Debt in 5 years than every Labour Government combined!

     This guy reckons he's probably trying to rectify the clusterfcuk he inherited from the previous shower.

Perhaps he shouldn't have boasted that he was going to clear the deficit then by through cutting spending and then not even halve it!

You must be completely economically illiterate to think that "labour overspending" cause the 2008 crash and that the Government are mending it!

Hugh Watt wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Yes. That last sentence is about right.

We spend far too much time worrying about cost as opposed to value - the two things are not the same.

Well said Jeremy Frank, spend, spend, spend..........the people demand it!

Somebody better tell this Guy, George Osborne has added more to the National Debt in 5 years than every Labour Government combined!

     This guy reckons he's probably trying to rectify the clusterfcuk he inherited from the previous shower.

Perhaps he shouldn't have boasted that he was going to clear the deficit then by through cutting spending and then not even halve it!

You must be completely economically illiterate to think that "labour overspending" cause the 2008 crash and that the Government are mending it!

Careful with the illiterateisms Hugh, you could end up looking a bit of a cnut

Back to the business case for the airport. From one point of view if it isn't market competitive (i.e. self-sufficient and profitable) then there is no case for it. That's basically straight up Thatcherite "you can't buck the market" stuff. And there is much in that but you can affect the market as every BoE interest rate change shows by having direct inflluence on the value of sterling. It's all a matter of nuance.

All the airport would need to do would be to be the decisive factor in a decision maker deciding to locate a new massive widget factory in Plymouth and not, say, Newquay. One person arriving could deliver direct employment for hundreds of people for years and indirect employment for many more.

OK so there's no guarantee that that will happen but that's a but like never taking a shot at goal and still hoping to score: you might get lucky and freak a goal somehow but the chances are you won't.

£1m a year for a Plymouth airport would be money well spent if I didn't have to get up at 2.30 am tomorrow to take my missus to Bristol airport.

To fly or not to fly? Neighbours have their say on future of Plymouth City Airport


The future of Plymouth’s former airport continues to provoke heated debate. Following the publication of a plan to develop the land for homes, reporters SAM BLACKLEDGE and ALEX WOOD asked people living near the flightpath for their views.

PLYMBRIDGE Road in Estover runs almost directly parallel to one of the most contentious strips of land in Plymouth, the 1,170m-long runway at the city’s disused airport.

Closed down and mothballed since 2011, the site has been effectively abandoned as politicians, business leaders and campaigners wrestle to establish control.

FlyPlymouth, formerly known as Viable, is determined to reintroduce passenger services within three years; but this week leaseholder Sutton Harbour Holdings unveiled plans to turn it into a new residential suburban community.
Related content

 Among those living just yards from the flightpath, opinion is split.

Mark Head, aged 45, says he “wouldn’t mind” seeing planes return.

“I think I’d rather that than it be developed as a housing estate,” he said.

“I think Plymouth needs an airport. It’s perhaps in the wrong location, but we have got to deal with what we’ve got.

“The traffic round here is that bad, if they made it into housing it would just make things worse.”

Kristy Lawrence, aged 37, has lived here for four years.

“I think housing and restaurants would be quite nice, I don’t think the airport was really used enough to be honest,” she says.

“I am not sure about 1,000 homes, I would be put off by that. Maybe a village type thing would be nice, a little like Crownhill, but a bigger version.

“The airport was still running when we moved in, my son was two and he adored it. He could watch it from my bedroom window.

“I did quite like it when it was mainly private planes and helicopters, it wasn’t really that noisy.”

A neighbour who only gives his name as Tom, aged 29, says: “We were here when the airport was open and we found it was quite nice with the planes being there, even when it was just the helicopter school at the end.

“These houses can have double glazing, so the sound wasn’t an issue.

“As far as the housing, it will lower the speed here. Nobody does 40mph here, especially not motorcyclists.

Read more: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sutton Harbour Holdings boss insists building homes on Plymouth Airport site will benefit everyone

THE boss of Sutton harbour Holdings says turning Plymouth Airport into a massive housing estate will help protect the city from 'savage' budget cuts.

SHH chief executive Jason Schofield last month unveiled his company's plan to build shops, restaurants, a velodrome and 1,600 homes on the site, which it leases from Plymouth City Council.

Critics said the scheme was merely 'wishful thinking'.

But Mr Schofield appeals directly to voters, saying that building on the airport would give the council £50m, as the local authority has the freehold. That money is badly needed, he says.
Related content

 Mr Schofield said: "I don't think the general public realises how savage the cuts (in council spending) are that will be coming through.

"The economy is getting better but not booming. We can't miss this opportunity. Plymouth needs homes and jobs."

The city's airport closed nearly four years ago due to decreasing passengers numbers and increasing financial losses. Plymouth City Council, which owns the site, ratified the closure by Sutton Harbour Holdings (SHH), the company that holds the lease.

A determined and well-organised pressure group, now a social enterprise known as FlyPlymouth, is fighting to get the airport reopened.

Those facts aside, about the only thing that both sides agree is the site could be an economic boon to Plymouth.

FlyPlymouth says a reopened airport would put £26 million into the city's economy annually. SHH says that £30m would come in each year from household spend, business rates and council tax alone if the 113-acre site were built on.

SHH's critics argue that development talk is pie in the sky as the airport enjoys protected status under the Plymouth Plan, the city's blueprint covering the period 2017-31.

Mr Schofield said: "If you are bald, you can't sit around hoping for your hair to regrow.

"Others who are bigger and have deeper pockets had tried and failed to make the airport work," says Mr Schofield. "When British Airways pulled out in 2000 nobody else was prepared to take it on."

"The company was strong and the economy was very strong. It was an opportunity," he says. "We saw synergy between running an airport and a sea port. When competition came in on the London Gatwick route we went for more routes. We tried everything. But the demand from passengers just wasn't there.

"If there was a mistake it was hanging on for too long.

Read more: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Gatwick to Central London minimum 40 mins
Exeter to Plymouth 40 mins
Could use the land for a new 40000 all seater stadium with a hotel, ice rink, shops, gym etc

Councillor accuses former Plymouth Airport operator of ignoring residents' wishes

Cllr Maddi Bridgeman


A COUNCILLOR who fought to protect Plymouth’s former airport has accused the company which leases the land of ignoring the wishes of city residents.

Earlier this week the boss of Sutton Harbour Holdings (SHH) said turning the airfield into a housing estate would help protect the city from savage budget cuts, generating cash for the council and stimulating the local economy.

But continuing the war of words over the Roborough site’s future, Cllr Maddi Bridgeman said: “I do not understand why SHH keep approaching The Herald with yet another plan to re-develop Plymouth’s Airport site. Do they have money to burn when commissioning report after report?”

SHH believes the airport could never reopen to passenger flights, having closed it in 2011 due to lack of demand.
Back in 2012 almost 38,000 people signed a petition to save the facility, which is now protected under the draft version of the Plymouth Plan, setting out development priorities until 2031.

Cllr Bridgeman, formerly a member of the Viable campaign group and now UKIP councillor for Moor View, said: “This plan has been written following extensive consultation with local businesses and the residents of Plymouth; it is part of the Localism Act instigated by central Government and therefore should not be dismissed lightly.

“We are very lucky that here in Plymouth the city council, council officers and councillors have worked extremely hard to ensure that Plymouth has a sturdy and comprehensive plan in line with the people’s views.”

Cllr Bridgeman says the road network in the north of the city has reached “breaking point”, and building more homes would only make this worse.

“My campaign to stand as a councillor for Moor View was largely around safeguarding the airport on behalf of the people of Plymouth, and on behalf of my residents in Moor View I will continue to work hard as your elected councillor and fight for the airport’s protection for as long as they allow it,” she said.

“I agree we need better job opportunities in Plymouth, therefore a re-opened airport best supports Plymouth as a growing and internationally recognised city.”

The truth is out, SHH not interested in Plymouth only to use the airport land to pay off it's debts

Quote

But the waterfront developer is still dealing with more than £22million of debt, up more than £1million from last year.
The group says it "remains focused" on planned developments, including that of the former airport and Sugar House, to cut these debts in the coming years.

Read more: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The truth comes out eventually. if they do build houses on the airport the infrastructure like the roads for example would struggle with all the extra traffic.

for a city to grow and develop you need two good transport links to London. Plymouth has absolutely none we need the airport and we need the m5 extended to marsh mills. if the city council are not careful we could be a small city full of tourists and not a lot else.