Thursday, 22 November 2012

Manston Airport not the end, but perhaps the beginning of the end.

 Looking at the various pro and anti airport, night flights and so on comments that always abound when I post about the airport, I wonder if the message the asking price for Manston, now in the £7m is now very close to the price of agricultural land is hitting home.
 Infratil the airports owners have now said they are considering funding alternative uses for Manston, see http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/121236/infratil-may-consider-investment-in-british-airports
 With the old Hoverport at Pegwell set to turn into a hovercraft museum, see http://www.thisiskent.co.uk/Hoverport-Pegwell-Bay-museum/story-17381039-detail/story.html perhaps some sort aircraft museum is the way to go.
We certainly have plenty of aviation history in the area and it is increasingly looking as though Thanet’s economy is moving towards a day out and short break tourism based economy, particularly in the realms of art. 
The airport today covers about 700 acres this is about £70,000 per acre compared with the average price of farmland in the southeast of about £50,000 per acre, with Manston losing about £2,000,000 the sums are not that difficult. 

93 comments:

  1. Simon,

    Where did you get your value of agricultural land of £50,000 per acre?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I dont know who Simon is but Michael, according to leading land agent Smiths Gore agricultural land is expected to hit £9,000 an acre by the end of the year. 700 times £9,000 would give £6.3 millions I believe. Now put a few houses on the site and somebody could make a packet.

      Delete
    2. And no doubt will if the airport closes.

      Delete
    3. Which could explain why some groups are so vociferous in wanting the airport closed down.

      Delete
    4. Sorry about that 11.24 bit of a senior moment or something, point is the sale price of the airport is abut the same as it would be if all the land it comprises was farmland.

      Thanks 12.16, this could be Simon of Thanet Life blog 11.24 means.

      12.33 John, I guess that would depend on the planning permission, at the moment I don’t think the airport has planning permission, certainly I would guess some housing would be on the cards.

      Delete
  2. I am one of those who champion the airport and wish it every sucsess

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don,

      Me too.

      In adition, I would loathe to see this land fall into the hands of a property speculator at some knock down price.

      Delete
  3. For many years I was involved in the Vintage Air Show world. Many venues were lost through 'development', for example The Great Warbirds Air Display over two days at West Malling Airfield was a crowd pulling success that provided anjoyment, entertainment and employment whilst boosting local trade too.
    My point [apart from wallowing in nostalgia of my happy 'Sally-B' days] is that then, as now, it is all too easy to close an airfield or airport and extremely hard to open one! Even our Prime Minister seems to find it impossible to get a grip on the opening issue.
    Perhaps the answer is simply to develop Manston as a freight hub along with developing the private flyer market [parking, training, hangerage, social activities]
    Gee! We could even see a revival of the once loved 'Pilot's Pals' calendars.[How about it Simon? You fly, you take photos? ....]

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Col,

      I too wish to see Manston airport kept open. Among the other things that you suggest could not Manston take some of the private hire business away from Luton?

      May I ask, what was or is 'Sally B'.

      Delete
    2. I thought it was all about the jobs. No significant job creation from a freight hub. Would maintain the status quo at Manston now while having a negative impact on the employment prospects from tourism. A terrible idea.

      Delete
    3. Educate yourself by visiting the hundreds of freight depots around Heathrow, then tell us there's no employment prospects!

      Delete
    4. anonymous @ 6:23 pm,

      Here, here.

      Freight is big business and it needs scores of people on the ground to run it.

      Delete
    5. "big businees freight" never came to Manston otherwise Infratil would be selling a thriving business rather than just trying to off load it. Manstons rather too far away from the M25 and freight by rail does not seem to work in this country.

      Delete
    6. The key word here is hub, should pressure at hub airports mean that Manson is used for large amounts of freight, then any associated freight hubs will in locations where they are as the centre of a supply wheel.

      The fundamental problem being that Manston is mostly surrounded by the sea, successive airline operators and airport operators have spent millions of pounds discovering that fish have a very limited demand for air transport.

      The difficulty for me here is trying to convey that fish also have little demand for goods carried by airfreight.

      Now I am wholly supportive of an airport at Manston that has a positive economic impact on the area, happy to have the government and Infratil heavily subsidise it, if there are any benefits to be had by the local community.

      A problem is that airports have an economic and environmental downside, particularly aspects like disruptive night flights and freight that is immediately transferred to road with very little local labour.

      All along the line my imperative is to try to ensure the people look to having a situation where the downsides are adequately compensated for by the upsides

      Delete
    7. Michael,

      How about the Flying Fish?



      Delete
    8. If Manston is so badly connected, how come a local freight company made its fortune by transporting Lufthansa freight from Heathrow to Frankfurt BY ROAD! Big business knows more about transport logistics than all of us put together, so how about leaving it to them.

      Delete
    9. Watch Michael change his tune if Labour, as seems likely, start getting enthusiastic about the airport again.

      Delete
    10. anonymous 7:13 AM

      You imply that Manston is not badly connected and at the same time cite a local company that you say has made its fortune by transporting freight from Heathrow to Frankfurt "BY ROAD!". I am confused for you seem to be speaking both for and against Manston in the same breath. Can you please clarify.

      Delete
  4. If it does close will the MOD still have to maintain the runway, control tower etc at a cost to taxpayer of at least £3 millions a year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only if still required as a master diversion airfield, which would seem inlikely if it was not kept open for any other purpose.

      Delete
  5. -major fright hub could be an answer it could also have a rail fright depot added to the site plus passenger station but this would upset the nibbys so will never happen as will anything elsethat would spoil the sleepy set

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah that would be “Fright Night” anon.

      Delete
    2. Every time that this subject rears its head I am driven to the conclusion that some group of people desperately want to build houses all over Manston.

      Delete
    3. Every time this subject rears its head I am driven to the conclusion that some group of people desperately want to fly freight 24/7 all over Ramsgate without considering, or caring, about the consequences.

      Delete
    4. Anon having lived for a few years under the flight path I nor my wife or kids were woken by the planes perhaps in the intervening years people have got softer and unable to sleep without absolute quiet . I have lived next to frieght yards Transport yards main roads and trains, I never have had a problem sleeping. I would surgest it is more in the mimby camp than in the realms of reality that it disturbs.

      Delete
    5. Don, please can you pass that on to the World Health Organisation - they'll be intrigued to find out all their research looking into the impact of night flights is clearly deeply flawed and can simply be attributed to nimby-ism. And anyone being put off investing in a tourist-related opportunity or anyone wanting to stay overnight in a hotel/B&B should take a leaf out of your book and get over themselves.

      Delete
    6. 4:53 on the basis of your argument nobody would ever stay in any hotel near an airport, in a majoy city or at many continental holiday resorts that have airfields immediately adjacent. Then maybe it is just airports near to Ramsgate that the WHO were referring to!
      Either you are having a laugh or your argument is getting increasingly desperate.

      Delete
  6. One way or the other whether Manston has a long term furture need sorting pronto. The Thanet area has been left in limbo for far too long. How can anyone plan in this situation. Thanet has had too many off these on/off situations over the last decade like China Gateway, like DreamLand, like Pleasurama, like the blight that is Arlington/Margate sea front, like will a ferry come to Ramsgate?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Not all freight is equal........

    Manston operates in the small market of dedicated freight aircraft. The vast majority of air freight goes in the belly of passenger aircraft. Manston doesn't have passenger aircraft, therefore it will only attract a tiny fraction of the business heathrow, stansted and gatwick does for freight.

    Michael, I like your agricultural land comparison. Of course, agricultural land is tricky to get planning permission for, unless it's on Thanet of course. East Kent business park, bits of Westwood, Thanet earth.

    I'd say the owners can do what they like with it. And Thanet council, blue or red, would not attempt to stop them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wow, freight would employ scores of people. Cabbages would employ scores. Thanet earth 2 would employ hundreds. A prison would employ hundreds. A massive housing development would employ hundreds over many years, then deposit lots of taxpayers to dwindles the unemployed percentages of Thanet.

    Why do people hang onto the idea of a crap airport when pretty much every other option would be better for the area on so many different levels?

    Is the 2 hour journey to gatwick once a year for your package fly/bus holiday of the Italian lakes so tortuous?

    The people wanting an airport on their own doorstep are the selfish ones.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 12:26,

      I am not clear how a massive housing development would, as you say, employ hundreds over many years. Perhaps you are referring to the construction workers; but these construction workers could just as easily be employed building an airport. Crucially, where are the jobs for these new occupants of this massive housing estate?

      Can you please clarify.

      Delete
    2. It wont just be houses. I am sure you are familiar with RAF West Malling where they have built a complete village, thousands of jobs in the business park, the sports club, the surgeries, the vets, the pub, the 2 schools, the 2 supermarkets, various other shops, restaurants, a golf club and all the other building and other trades like window cleaners and gardeners that are needed to service the 2000 plus houses. And all achieved over twenty years.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous @ 2:07,

      You have repeatedly sung the praises of Kings Hill, the erstwhile West Malling. Would it be wrong of me to conclude that you have some finacial connection with the development, an estate agent, maybe.

      Delete
    4. wrong I am retired for more than 8 years, just pointing out that if Infratil cant sell the airport as a going concern then it does not have to be all gloom.

      Delete
    5. A mixed housing and commercial estate is gloom for some of us, 7:50.

      Delete
    6. anonymous @ 7:50,

      Perchance do you live under the Manston flight path? This would explain much of what you say.

      Tom Clark tells us below that neither can Infratil sell Prestwick.

      Delete
    7. John, no answer on how to create jobs? I'm no retired, I have no financial interest in houses apart from the one that I live in, but I know a lost opportunity when I see one. Unfortunately for me, Infratil have taken 6 years too long to come found to my way of thinking, which is other uses must be explored. As an airport, smattering of freight and yet to be successful KLM flights don't make money for Infratil.

      If Infratil don't make money, jobs will not be created, and 700 acres will sit as wasteland.

      Delete
    8. Infratil are selling Prestwick for the same reason they are selling Manston. They cant make either of them pay and in the case of Prestwick RyanAir has moved to Edinburgh and no other airlines have moved in. Passengers numbers have fallen by half in 4 years. Infratil have an obligation to their share holders and both the airports have fallen far short of the company's aim of making a 20% return (after tax) on their capital.

      Delete
  9. John, where are all of the jobs for the vast majority of thanetians? Everywhere, anywhere. 90% of the houses will be private owner occupied, so will require cash/mortgages. Mortgages require jobs.

    Hundreds of jobs to construct a new village. Kings hill has taken 20 years.

    Manston airport is already built, as you keep on telling us. It's already got room for 1,000,000 passengers. When would any construction be needed at the airport while it's an airport? Not for a very long time.

    This country has a housing shortage. It does not have an airport shortage.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Just to remind you John, because you keep forgetting. Many people, across the country, no across the world, sometimes travel from their home long long distances, sometimes up to an hour, in extreme cases even longer to get to work.

    It's called commuting.

    When a house is built, it is usually occupied by people. People need food. Haircuts. Clothes,Electricity. These goods, services need people to provide them. It's called indirect employment. More people, housing creates more jobs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous @ 2:50,

      I now recognise you from before. You are 'Kings Hill'. I need no lessons from you on commuting. I commuted from Ramsgate to Westminster for more than 3 years - over 4 hours a day. Neither do I need to be educated on how other people around the world travel to work bearing in mind that I lived and worked abroad, in various countries, for 21 years. I will not waste any more of my time because I have already discussed all of this with you weeks ago. It is a pity that that you cannot give yourself a unique blogging name such as 'Kings Hill'. I would then know better not to enter into circular arguments with you.

      Delete
  11. I think some commentators may be adrift of the point raise in this post, which is it isn’t the nimbys proposing changing Manston from an airport to some other use, but Infratil the airport owners.

    As a multinational company their primary objective isn’t to subsidise foreign airports but it is to make money.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I don't think anyone has missed the point, Michael. As ever when the airport is raised as a subject up leap all the antis with their usually arguments, invariably including the aquifer fanatic, and a group of us who feel it still has prospects seek to give the case for.

    Sure, Infratil are looking for a way out, but they are not the only airport operators in the world. It is, however, a low in the world of aviation and it is worthy of note that they cannot sell Prestwick either. I wonder if the same arguments apply against that field as do with Manston.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An aquifer under the runway is a major point isn't it Tom? You seem to overlook the aquifer repeatedly.

      What fool would want to endanger the water supply for an airport or any other construction?

      The pro-Manston brigade have been proven wrong repeatedly on jobs - and silent when Infratil cut jobs - and simply stuck in sentiment or the past or both for an airport that was funded out of tax for the RAF. Then closed leaving ex-RAFers no doubt at a loose end.

      Since it was no longer required it's been a costly and dangerous disaster to the public (in breach of all the specified safety guidelines eg TDC removing monitors and missing fines) - the sooner it's closed like most WW2 airfields and a Police investigation underway the better.

      One Cargolux flight a week and the promise of a KLM flight a day do not a viable airport make - either with the aquifer or not.

      Delete
    2. One Cargolux flight a week? Are you serous try every day not to mention the My Cargo and Air Cargo Germany flights plus the odd other cargo flights I think Manston should be the freight hub of southern England. Anyway hope when KLM CITYHOPPER starts flying Manston gets sold.

      Delete
  13. Not sure why Tom Clarke is going on about others and their "usual" arguments. Jeez, if he's not been like a stuck record for the past god knows how many years I don't know who has.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Love you too, sweetie 9:53. Keep dishing out the compliments and who knows where it might get you.

      Delete
  14. At least you get arguments from those who question the validity of Infratil's claims and the sense of allowing night flights. All we get from the pros is that they don't appreciate anyone who wasn't born in Thanet having an opinion, and ideally you should be ex-RAF with rose-tinted aviator glasses, or at the very least raised next to a noisy manufacturing unit to know what real noise is like. What you never get is a considered, coherent case as to why Manston could succeed, and why it deserves to given its location and track record, and the way it deals with its neighbors. Simply attacking those who see the detrimental impact of the threat of night flights has over Ramsgate by pulling the 'nimby' card isn't good enough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous @ 8:51AM,

      I support the development of Manston as an Airport. So just for the record, I was not born in Thanet. I have lived most of my life outside Thanet, sometimes as much as 8,000 miles away. I was in the RAF, though only briefly, and served half my time on non-flying stations in the quiet of the countryside.

      I have read through your argument. It occurs to me that you are judging your opponents by your own standards. A less charitable person than me could infer that you regard service in the RAF as detrimental to your interlocutor's argument. Particularly if their opinion happens to disagree with yours.

      Just out of curiosity, have you ever served in HM Forces?

      Delete
    2. I was born on an RAF camp and my father and uncle were both fighter pilots, grandfather a rear gunner in WW1, other grandfather a major in the army in WW2. I love planes and was an air cadet with a view to joining up myself. Fortunately this doesn't cloud my judgement when it comes to working out the pros and cons of having night flights over the town which I now call home and where I've chosen to raise a family.

      Delete
    3. Wouldn't they have you, 1:57? By the way, do you ever consider the people living in Crawley or the many suberbs around Heathrow when you take a flight. Selfish a bit are we not, said Yoda.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous @ 1:57PM,

      There has been an airfield at Manston since 1916. In these circumstances I find it curious that you decided to settle here bearing in your dislike of aircraft noise.

      Delete
    5. Don't know whether you're deliberately missing the point but I don't have a problem with aircraft flying during the day, and I've never flown at night. Both these last comments confirm what I was saying before - no coherent arguments just false assumptions and wallowing in a bit of history.

      Delete
  15. John, you do need reminding as you have a fixation that Thanet can't take anymore people because thereare no jobs in the area. I'm arguing that people need jobs, and people can travel. A five dwelling hamlet might have 100% employment but zero jobs. A high unemployment rate in an area may not be a problem with the area, but the people in it.

    So come on John, I've given an opinion how how hundreds of jobs could be created at Manston and indirect jobs created ad infinitum. You've suggested building jobs being created for an airport that's already built.

    Is the real reason you are so supportive of Manston because you can't be arsed to drive 2 hours to Gatwick for your holidays?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sadly, Queens Mound, you destroy any case you may have by your final paragraph. It is not so much a case of John not being arsed to drive to Gatwick but more a case of you not being arsed to enter a reasoned debate. Insulting your opponent is a sure sign of a weak argument.

      Delete
    2. 'Kings Hill' becomes 'Queens Mound'.

      Queens Mound,

      Please do not presume to lecture me on what you assume to be my, as you call them, fixations.

      You ask me, "Is the real reason you are so supportive of Manston because you can't be arsed to drive 2 hours to Gatwick for your holidays?" - No.

      Delete
  16. John does not put together any reasoned argument why the airport should remain as an airport. In the absence of any debate, one can only guess why he doth love it so much.

    Misty eyed Ex RAF or too lazy to go to Gatwick is my Opinion.

    My uncle who served in the RAF for 25 years had never heard of the place when he ventured down here.

    We are getting very precious about being lectured. It's just a simple posting from Michael that the airport owners are looking at alternatives to An airport. Ive got my ideas. I'd love to hear yours.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Princess Bump,

      "My uncle who served in the RAF for 25 years had never heard of the place when he ventured down here";

      "Misty eyed Ex RAF or too lazy to go to Gatwick is my Opinion."; and

      "..he doth love it so much."

      Thy post is variously superficial, fabricated and nonsensical, with an added gratuitous attempt to insult.

      Delete
    2. My Uncle was on DestroyersNovember 25, 2012 10:37 am

      Sounds like your uncle was the bedding store corporal at Waddington and never venture out of Lincolnshire. What relevance to anything is it that he had never heard of Manston, the most bombed airfield in WWII, one of the RAF's founder stations and once the South East master diversion field. Sounds like your case is a bit like your uncle, fairly ill informed.

      Delete
  17. "I support the development of Manston as an Airport."

    As long as you do this with your money, I'm happy. What I object to is all of the pro-airport loonies campaigning to have public money spent on a dead duck. I don't want one red cent of my money spent on the place. It isn't that I'm against airports per se. Lord no, I see enough of them. It's just that I think it will go bust and any public money ploughed into it will have been wasted. In Thanet we are surrounded by white elephants which have been created using public funds. You can't realistically argue that this wouldn't be yet another. So, if you really support it and believe it will be a success, back it with your own money. Remortgage the house, put your wife to work in the fields and sell your children; but don't back it with my money.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point - we seem to have lots of pensioners and many of them ex-RAF that think Manston could - or even should - succeed as a commercial airport.

      They are of the past.

      Manston is bust and up for sale.

      The aquifer means it's unlikely to be sold for an airport or anything else. Back to farmland or fields again. The remaining dozen or so airport jobs will find other employment just as when say Woolworth closed - hopefully cleaning up the pollution at Manston.

      Infratil won't be so sentimental and will try and walk away leaving a mess like the other toxic white elephants of Hoverport or Thor or even Pleasasurama and Turner and Tesco-Arlington.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 11:10 are you actually talking to yourself at anonymous 8:52. It is even possible that you are aka Queens Mound aka Princess Bump.

      Delete
    3. No on both counts John: 12:25 and 12:30. The post at 8:52 is certainly not nonsensical - why do you think the public should put more tax-money into Manston now?

      The points at 11:10 on the aquifer or fines or banned aircraft you haven't covered. As per the earlier comment it seems you've fond memories of Manston from your youth or RAF days or you can't be arsed to drive 2 hours to Gatwick for your holidays. And would risk cancer for the privilege.

      Manston is bust and for sale again or do you see potential that nobody else has or does? Certainly the local political leaders are in favour of it but that looks like clutching at straws to avoid resigning after years of failure doesn't it?

      Delete
    4. Hmm strange that only 2% of pollution is from Manston why the remaining 98% is from cars buses lorry's and that's smart add more pollution from you car when you could of done the short trip to Manston they should do flights to alicante from Manston then all you lot can have a holiday in benidorm!

      Delete
  18. As much as I'd love to spend all day on michaels blog, I have other things to occupy my day - chain myself to animal transportation at ramsgate harbour or camp outside of turner to bring attention to our cause.

    Not to belittle other peoples gripes, I have only one concern, and thats the economic future of this town in this district in this county in this country. Manston will not succeed. It's owners realise it, but certain councillors, 'business leaders' and blog poster/letter writers can't. The reason why Britain is not great anymore is because of those stuck in a time warp backing outdated, dead duck ideas.

    If manston was closing as a distinguished raf base tomorrow, why not give it a chance as a private airport. But 20 years on, with no success and years of losing money? Time for a change. And if you can't see it, should've gone to specsavers.

    The uncle who had never heard of manston - I was demonstrating that it had lost its allure when he served from the 1950's - the decade you lot still sem to be living in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Prince @ 9:26 aka......

      I will not seek to detain you bearing in mind your busy and demanding lifestyle. But I thought it worth a mention that the word 'Great' in Great Britain arose to indicate land mass and not wealth or power. Presumably you believe that Great Britain has physically shrunk in size, "because of those stuck in a time warp backing outdated, dead duck ideas." Has perhaps the Isle Of Wight seceded, or something, and do you consider me in part responsible for this.

      Delete
    2. Princess,

      About you alledged uncle who, curiusly, had never heard of RAF Manston. Presumably, he had also never heard of RAF Ash (formerly RAF Sandwich).

      Delete
  19. Twenty of the 66 comments are from John Holyer. And in none of them does he explain why he thinks an operator at Manston can succeed when every one so far has failed - even after large investments of taxpayers' money. No doubt I shall attract post number 21, with more abuse and no facts!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Allan Mallinson (ex Army not RAF)November 26, 2012 1:20 pm

      Equally, Anon 12:53, none of the opponents have a real argument against Manston as a regional airport other than objections that could equally apply to almost every other airfield in the UK. The perpetual references to people having nostalgic memories of time in the RAF are just plain pathetic and if that is the best argument you can come up, your case must be very thin indeed.

      Delete
    2. I (12.53) had not posted on this topic previously, Alan, and so the "pathetic" nostalgic memories argument is not mine. My "case" is that the failure of every previous operator suggests Manson may not have the potential some suggest. What is your case?

      Delete

    3. Allan: You're kidding. No other airport has repeatedly gone bust or is on the drinking water or has soaked up large amounts of tax-funds - or had the monitors removed since 2006 to reduce fines and pollution notices. Aside from that it's like every other successful airport up for sale(!).

      Would you even risk buying a KLM flight before April and Buchanan's desperate election stunt just before the May elections?

      The sooner the Police are called in for arrests, the TDC and KCC and KIACC cover-up ends and Manston closes down the better.

      Couldn't agree more with the John Holyer 20 out of 66 comments point - ever quibbling but no argument or explanations beyond sentiment or memories of way back when. Infratil won't even thank him when they sack everyone and leave.

      Delete
    4. 6:28 I am not kidding for Manston has not gone bust, it is simply running at a loss as are several other airfields. There is a restaurant over Broadstairs way which is a great success yet failed miserable under four previous names and ownerships. The Albion Bookshops in Cliftonville and Broadstairs folded but Michael keeps going. There is plenty of evidence of success from previous failure and that could happen at Manston.

      The static monitors were replaced by mobile units to test levels around Thanet, but then you know that. You simply choose to ignore it because it negates your argument.

      How many times and how many people have to tell you that police can only deal with criminal offences and most of what you refer to are breaches of operating agreements or licences. There somebody has to sue for it is a civil matter.

      See you castigate John Holyer for his alleged twenty comments. How many do you think you have made on the aquifer or is that OK because its you.

      Delete
    5. Allan: Your argument for Manston doesn't stack up. After 10 years it's not bust but resting ready to be a great success? Every airline has gone bust there but it's bound to be a success soon?

      Drivel.

      And you ignore the aquifer. It's under the runway Allan. It's polluted. So you think that's not a problem and should be ignored?

      I don't castigate John for his 20 comments - the point made though is that his comments ignore the issues raised. Just as you're ignoring the aquifer.

      So you do know about monitors removed - but your point on the monitors is deliberately misleading. The main monitors were removed from a school and tower block in 2006. They could have been replaced as they wre required. Since then there are no monitors are at best completely weak monitoring that's either broken or simply nonexistent. Mobile monitors are your invention.

      Thanet's air pollution was 6x EU safety levels remember, as you'd expect.

      Infratil and TDC were deliberately reducing the monitoring to allow for expansion and negate the resulting cancer etc.

      Infratil and TDC haven't provided monitor readings in years and certainly nothing credible. Every month there's a KIACC or Airport or Council meeting.

      Why are you so keen to ignore them polluting you? Infratil won't thank you when they leave.

      One other point - why the overflights of the town? They're required to go over the rural end aren't they? Let's not bother with the missing fines for effective monitoring danger of IranAir or Afghan Air.

      Your grasp of law is flimsy when negligence etc becomes a crime. The Police should make Infratil arrests before they disappear and the same at TDC.



      Delete
    6. Are you a member of the green party that talks b*llocks seems it? Anyway I wouldn't call EUjet a failure they did have some good routes it was the owners fault who started up with too many routes!!!!!! Anyway if Manston closes then think they should build a nuclear power plant on the site.

      Delete
  20. Anon 12:53 aka anonymous various, Queens Mound, Princess Bump, Prince's Bulge,

    To hear you whining about abuse is a bit rich bearing in mind your own fondness for this mode of discourse. Anyway I thought you said you going to spend today chained to some railings.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anon at 4:58 AKA, various other as anonymous, Prince's Bulge, Princess Bump, Queens Mound,

    You say, "I .... had not posted on this topic previously,". Of course you havn't and neither have I.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Why does John Holyer believe that everyone who disagrees with his view is the same person? For what it's worth, mine (12.53) was a first-time intervention, but I have learned my lesson from his bizarre response and shall not bother to join the debate in future.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 5:56,

      I do not accept that this was your first time intervention. The manner, matter and mood of your comments perfectly match those of a person aka anonymous, Prince's Bulge, Princess Bump, Queens Mound, Prince's Bulge

      Delete
    2. As the writer, I feel I am in a better position to know than you! But if you prefer an inverted "I am Sparticus" fantasy, in which only one person disagrees with you, so be it. I was tempted to write "I do not accept that you are John Holyer".

      Delete
    3. Anonymous at 8:43 PM,

      And I still do not believe you.


      Delete
  23. So if Infratil cannot find a buyer how much longer will they continue to loose £2 millions a year? With the asking price now about £7.5 million it may be cheaper for them to either give it away or close it as an airport. An alternative would be for KCC to buy and operate it as an airport. At todays price I am sure they could afford it and run it alongside their many other commercial enterprises. In the past they have alway been keen to promote Manston and this could be their chance to buy it for a song and it may even fit well with the EKO venture.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does Manston fit well with EKO because it too is rarely used and loses money hand over fist?

      Delete
    2. EKO was Manston/ChinaGateway/warehouses wasn't it? Nobody seems to know what it was exactly. The first Road to Nowhere too? The 4th town centre houses? Who knows.

      FOI of the EKO invoices for the millions of pounds spent would be useful and interesting.

      Delete
    3. From the TDC 2012 EKO Review Report TDC still owe KCC £2.54 millions for its share of the cost of the road to nowhere. Just think for the cost of this road KCC/TDC could have bought Manston at todays price.

      Delete
    4. Thanks for link but can't open it - c.£2.5M still to repay for roads, any idea of total budget and what EKO was? Separate to ChinaGate and Manston?

      On Manston nobody's explained the overflights which are banned? Really whatever TDC or KIACC or bloggers here say about Manston is ignored: Infratil will do as they please until prosecuted or arrested.

      Clearly TDC or KCC councillors/civil servants won't do that as it would expose why they have done so little so far, and Kent Police, Environment Agency and Southern Water are much the same - protecting their pensions and keeping quiet.

      While Gale and Sandys etc bluff it out that Manston is viable and wonderful - I hope they're not involved in other major economic or infrastructure decisions. I certainly wouldn't buy a used airport in their backyard on their say-so.

      Maybe someone with cancer etc should start a test case and spend their remaining days going in and out of court and hospital? Maybe a policeman with cancer? Although cancer around an airport could be from pollen rather than aviation fuel at 6x EU emissions?

      Delete

    5. The Guardian front page: British Virgin Islands tax dodge expose - Ramsgate High St, Hardres St and Westcliff(!) mentioned with Mayfair, Kensington etc but not Pleasurama

      Delete
  24. Surely if John Holyer transposes his efforts on this and other blogs in regards to supporting Manston, he'll be buying up every ticket for the KLM flights to schipol.

    And no, he's ever heard of RAF ash.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm Spartacus AKA various other as anonymous, Prince's Bulge, Princess Bump, Queens Mound,Prince's Bulge,

      nonsensical.

      Had he heard of RAF Church Fenton?

      Delete
  25. John, I'll get him to log on so you can have an RAF base-off.

    When you're finished, can we play my dads bigger than your dad?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Duke's hump,

    Yes, get him to log on. I'm interested in hearing the name you will use to pose as him - 'Baron of the Hillock'?

    Has he heard of 'Much Binding In The Marsh'?

    ReplyDelete
  27. I Am Very Happy To Read Of Your Blog.Really Great Post.Its brilliant.

    Airport Training

    ReplyDelete
  28. I am fully in support of Manston expanding. It is intresting to note that Southend Airport which it could be said have worse road links to London is thriving with a big expansion taking place. Manston has much more potential than Southend. I am sure if you timed the plane to home time from Manston for a lot of people it would be much quicker than going to Gatwick or Stanstead. It is that that needs to be promoted. Also if the government are serious about the congestion of the London airports then they need to take positive action about Manston

    ReplyDelete

Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive, anonymous derogatory comments about real people, comments baiting internet trolls, comments saying that an anonymous comment was made by a named real person, boring comments and spam comments, comments in CAPs will be deleted. Playground stuff like calling real people by their time stamp or surname alone, referring to groups as gangs, old duffers and so on will result in deletion. Comment that may be construed as offensive to minority groups is not allowed here either, so think before you write it, remember that the internet is a public place, that it is very difficult to be truly anonymous and that everyone who uses it leaves a trail of some sort. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts. When things are particularly difficult on the commercial spam front I may turn comment moderation on for periods.

If you feel that someone has left a comment that is offensive and directed at you personally please email me (link on the sidebar) asking to have it removed, you will need to tell which post and the date and timestamp of the offending comment. Please do not reply to the offending comment as I will assume you continuing the dialogue as meaning that you want the comments left there.