My view on this is that this is nothing at all to do with the runway at LBA or the 777. It is a cost cutting measure, pure and simple, by an airline that is struggling in many ways, especially financially. They operate into LBA but tend to move crews to and from MAN, which increases their operating costs. They do carry good loads but they will do the same from MAN on a 777, and I would strongly suspect that operating from MAN will, overall, reduce their operating costs without negatively impacting on loads, especially since they now don't have Air Blue to compete with. This is what happens when one airline has it all to themselves.
A further reason which to me proves this is nothing to do with the runway is that PIA also withdrew from GLA last year I believe?
The fact is, like it or not, the presence of MAN is always going to impact on LBA when it comes to long haul. This is not an example of why the runway should be extended (and I for one would love it to be) - it is an example of why Bridgepoint will not spend many millions of pounds extending it, because they know that the additional long haul flights they would attract will be insufficient to justify the expenditure, particularly with new technology aircraft around the corner that should be capable of using LBA more comfortably. Quite simply, the cost just doesn't stack up, partially due to the need for huge amounts of land infill at either end - and a road tunnel too at the Yeadon end for Cemetary Road - and the presence of the Chevin which would, in any case, result in landing restrictions on runway 14.
Believe me when I say I have discussed this many times with airport directors and it has been further discussed many times at the Consultative Committee meeting. We have to accept that whenever a large amount of money is spent, there has to be payback within a given period. That is a standard business requirement in all industries. It is unfortunate that MAN's influence spreads well outside the NW when it comes to long haul. It is not only LBA that suffers - LPL has nothing and DSA has nothing, despite its super duper long runway that they keep telling us about.
So guys, if you think that the loss of ISB is going to bring about a change of heart on the runway, think again. I wish it were not so, but it is not going to happen. The best we could hope for is a relocation of the touch down point to increase landing distances on 32 and even that is well down the priority list for LBA, for pretty much the same reasons - cost v benefit doesn't stack up. Personally I don't agree on that one, as there are safety issues as well as operational, but we all want the stands and the terminal don't we? They are always going to come first and I would think a parallel taxiway will be right behind.
