Infratil Airports Europe; right ingredients wrong outcome

Infratil's assessment of their European airports, in their own words...

In the 1990s Australia and New Zealand were amongst the first countries to sell state-owned airports and to allow their commercial operation. The resulting value uplift encouraged Australasian investors to look at markets where similar developments were occurring, which led to Europe.

Infratil invested in Prestwick, Kent and Lübeck airports and purchased an option over an airport near Berlin. These airports were acquired at well below replacement cost as rapid growth in European air travel made it likely that their capacity would soon become needed and valuable.

Kent for instance cost less than £20 million and the next London runway will cost over £2 billion (Mayor Boris Johnson’s preferred site in the Thames Estuary is likely to cost over £20 billion).

Notwithstanding this enormous potential, Infratil has now called it quits. European air traffic growth has slowed so that the need for additional airfield capacity is postponed, and Infratil’s assessment of the relative benefits of waiting (and continuing to meet operating cost) versus refocussing elsewhere have favoured exit.

Infratil Update September 2012

Thoughts from the think tanks

A couple of think tanks (Policy Exchange and Centre Forum) have got their heads together to produce a thoughtful and thought-provoking analysis of possible solutions to aviation capacity in the south-east.

The best approach would be to build a new four runway Heathrow, immediately west of the current site. These new runways would replace the existing runways. This would be straightforward to construct, and relatively low cost by the standards of hub airports. A combination of tightening permitted noise classes, ending night flights and landing narrow bodied planes more steeply makes it almost certain that this airport would be significantly quieter than the existing airport, despite catering for almost twice as many flights.

Leaving the airport where it is works for air traffic control. It also works for the wider economy: companies that have located near to the airport because they need to be near the airport do not have to move. The design of airport proposed here would be operationally efficient for both passengers and airlines, and would be the world’s best hub.

Click to read more ...

KCC's contribution, for what it's worth

Boldly Stepping...

KCC are happily throttling themselves with management speak and business jargon, which is why some of their worst ideas are dressed up as "Bold Steps". The latest in the series is "Bold Steps for Aviation" which is described as

"a discussion paper which suggests how the UK's aviation capacity needs could be met without the need to develop a new hub airport in the Thames Estuary.  It is intended to contribute to the national debate and is published in response to the recent proposals from Lord Foster and the Mayor of London."

Like it or not, KCC's voice will carry some weight in the interminable debate about future flight capacity in the south-east, and this document is what they're thinking of saying on our behalf.

Click to read more ...

Knight vision

I wonder if Sir Roger Gale MP understands aviation. He says that "the new Secretary of State for Transport, Justine Greening, needs to take a long, hard, look at the available and under-used facilities that already exist. That must, of course, include Manston." And then what? What does he think will happen after this purposeful looking?

The top end of the aviation industry is characterised by huge budgets and small margins. The successful players continually examine and re-examine every opportunity the market has to offer. It is a very pure form of market-driven capitalism, and as his ex-Boss once said "You can't buck the market".

The major (and minor) players in the aviation industry have been examining, and then rejecting, Manston for over a decade. In addition, throughout that time, each owner of Manston has been doing their utmost to attract business. Does Sir Roger really think that a thoughtful stare from a Secretary of State is going to transform a history of hard-headed rejections into a future of warm-hearted embraces?

Click to read more ...

Cameron shoots everybody in the foot, himself first

How NOT to make a decision on Boris Island

There is a right way and a wrong way to make decisions on airports. The right way:

Set out the need for the development and options in a draft aviation NPS;

Carry out an SEA and consultation;

Choose an option and put the NPS to parliament;

Minister makes final decision.

Cameron has shown that he is is own worst enemy when it comes to major policy decisions. The rules aren't that complicated - they can be written on the back of an envelope.

Click to read more ...

CAA wants more runways

Once upon a time, I thought the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) was independent. Hah! Fool.

I had assumed that as the regulatory body for the aviation industry, the CAA would be knowledgeable about (but independent of) the industry, and probably linked to the government (Dept of Transport?) in some way. No.

The CAA is entirely funded by the industry it regulates, and doubles up as an official-sounding (and well-funded) mouthpiece for the nation's propellor-heads. This explains why they keep churning out unquestioningly pro-aviation agitprop...

Click to read more ...

Boris Island must never be able to get off the ground

Any new major airport near the Thames Estuary is impractical because of politics and birds

At first the idea of a new airport on, or even in, the Thames Estuary seemed to be just one of the Mayor of London's less amusing flights of fancy, but now the arrival of a proposal by the architect Norman Foster has given it some respectability. The idea of replacing Heathrow and moving east is not new. Forty years ago, Maplin Sands, off Essex, was held up as a possible site, but interest soon dwindled and the present proposals seem just as likely to fade when confronted by the real situation: that a new airport is both impractical and unnecessary.

Click to read more ...

Boris Johnson still bonkers

The highly educated buffoon who inexplicably beat several X-Factor contestants to get a responsible job running one of the greatest cities in the world is still making a public fool of himself. Unaware of where the boundaries of London might actually be, he seems to believe that his personal authority extends to wherever the placenames are written in English, which goes some way towards explaining why he thinks he can build an island in the shipping lanes of the Thames.

Click to read more ...

Hypocrisy

Last week's pithy missive from Mrs. Earplugs to Paul Carter FC via his blog on the KCC website.  No reply yet. I expect he's busy.

You say you understand that Boris doesn't want a third runway at Heathrow and that you don't want an airport in the estuary. And then you say you want more use to be made of Manston. Of course, you live nowhere near it, so you will not be experiencing what we on the flight path will experience.

Also, you have demonstrated by your avoidance of the KIACC meetings how little attention you propose to pay to the views of those most affected by your dreams of seeing more flights at Manston. May I borrow the phrase you used of the Audit Commission and categorise this as "stunning hypocrisy" on your part?

Carter prefers Manston to Boris Island

Kent County Council leader Paul Carter has hit back at Boris Johnson's call for a new airport in the Thames Estuary. Mr Johnson, the Tories' London mayoral candidate, is calling on the Government to reconsider plans for a new airport in the estuary instead of going ahead with the widely opposed plans for a third runway at Heathrow.

But Cllr Carter on the other hand believes Kent International Airport at Manston could be the solution to improve airport capacity and has invited MP Boris Johnson to see for himself.

Click to read more ...