BfS - FR

[Bearsden]

They won't reopen a GLA base, because they don't need to.

I'll second that motion - GLA should be able to hold onto a few very specific non-based routes, but there is a base of 10 aircraft along the road and a base of 2-3 aircraft with a maintenance facility down the road (the latter of course subsidised by the Scottish Government and military traffic)

[Iain]

Local press report on the BFS development:

https://www-belfastlive-co-uk.cdn.amppr ... -24422841

[Clive]

They won't reopen a GLA base, because they don't need to.

I'll second that motion - GLA should be able to hold onto a few very specific non-based routes, but there is a base of 10 aircraft along the road and a base of 2-3 aircraft with a maintenance facility down the road (the latter of course subsidised by the Scottish Government and military traffic)

Do we normally cite cross subsidies of income streams at airports? For example does this mean that Loganair are subsidised by the BA maintenance facilities at GLA and ambulance flights by Gama? Not really - we only say these things about PIK because it’s owned by the Scottish Government.

[atuk]

[quote=Bearsden post_id=7229 time=<a href="tel:1657217970">1657217970</a> user_id=72]
[quote=GKirk post_id=7228 time=<a href="tel:1657216313">1657216313</a> user_id=86]
They won't reopen a GLA base, because they don't need to.

I'll second that motion - GLA should be able to hold onto a few very specific non-based routes, but there is a base of 10 aircraft along the road and a base of 2-3 aircraft with a maintenance facility down the road (the latter of course subsidised by the Scottish Government and military traffic)
[/quote]

Do we normally cite cross subsidies of income streams at airports? For example does this mean that Loganair are subsidised by the BA maintenance facilities at GLA and ambulance flights by Gama? Not really - we only say these things about PIK because it’s owned by the Scottish Government.
[/quote]

Why does every viewpoint opposed to your own receive brickbats?

Just asking as every time someone posts something which is more than relevant and contains accurate information is deemed to be irrelevant as it doesn’t relate to your viewpoint?

Is it cancel culture? Just asking as the “auld Bint “ on check in as I sometimes call myself!

[Clive]

[quote=Bearsden post_id=7229 time=<a href="tel:1657217970">1657217970</a> user_id=72]
[quote=GKirk post_id=7228 time=<a href="tel:1657216313">1657216313</a> user_id=86]
They won't reopen a GLA base, because they don't need to.

I'll second that motion - GLA should be able to hold onto a few very specific non-based routes, but there is a base of 10 aircraft along the road and a base of 2-3 aircraft with a maintenance facility down the road (the latter of course subsidised by the Scottish Government and military traffic)

Do we normally cite cross subsidies of income streams at airports? For example does this mean that Loganair are subsidised by the BA maintenance facilities at GLA and ambulance flights by Gama? Not really - we only say these things about PIK because it’s owned by the Scottish Government.
[/quote]

Why does every viewpoint opposed to your own receive brickbats?

Just asking as every time someone posts something which is more than relevant and contains accurate information is deemed to be irrelevant as it doesn’t relate to your viewpoint?

Is it cancel culture? Just asking as the “auld Bint “ on check in as I sometimes call myself!
[/quote]

Feck-all to do with me pal. I left Bill to handle that complaint against your language so that you couldn’t accuse me of the above.

You have told me you have no respect for me so as co-moderator I’m afraid that will have to go both ways. If you don’t like this forum or the way we run it, no one is forcing you to be a member.

Finally, a reminder of one of the rules: moderator’s decisions are not up for debate.

[bill]

Central Belt has three airports. One is a dead duck. One is struggling to attract new routes. One is driving forward.
Id wager that we only need two airports. You could argue for and against only one.
Sort that out and Glasgow has a chance. If its staus quo, then Im afraid, this is it..

Yup. Pure and simple. I'm sick of saying get the two PIK based aircraft up the road to GLA and watch the results. The stick in the spoke seems to be Provan and his continued sneering towards lo-co.

[GeorgeNTravels]

Central Belt has three airports. One is a dead duck. One is struggling to attract new routes. One is driving forward.
Id wager that we only need two airports. You could argue for and against only one.
Sort that out and Glasgow has a chance. If its staus quo, then Im afraid, this is it..

Yup. Pure and simple. I'm sick of saying get the two PIK based aircraft up the road to GLA and watch the results. The stick in the spoke seems to be Provan and his continued sneering towards lo-co.

Maybe the potential strike action at PIK will make FR consider GLA more.

[buddyboy]

[quote=Bearsden post_id=7229 time=<a href="tel:1657217970">1657217970</a> user_id=72]
[quote=GKirk post_id=7228 time=<a href="tel:1657216313">1657216313</a> user_id=86]
They won't reopen a GLA base, because they don't need to.

I'll second that motion - GLA should be able to hold onto a few very specific non-based routes, but there is a base of 10 aircraft along the road and a base of 2-3 aircraft with a maintenance facility down the road (the latter of course subsidised by the Scottish Government and military traffic)

Do we normally cite cross subsidies of income streams at airports? For example does this mean that Loganair are subsidised by the BA maintenance facilities at GLA and ambulance flights by Gama? Not really - we only say these things about PIK because it’s owned by the Scottish Government.

Why does every viewpoint opposed to your own receive brickbats?

Just asking as every time someone posts something which is more than relevant and contains accurate information is deemed to be irrelevant as it doesn’t relate to your viewpoint?

Is it cancel culture? Just asking as the “auld Bint “ on check in as I sometimes call myself!
[/quote]

Feck-all to do with me pal. I left Bill to handle that complaint against your language so that you couldn’t accuse me of the above.

You have told me you have no respect for me so as co-moderator I’m afraid that will have to go both ways. If you don’t like this forum or the way we run it, no one is forcing you to be a member.

Finally, a reminder of one of the rules: moderator’s decisions are not up for debate.
[/quote]

Clive I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. The Scottish government do subsidise PIK. If they had not, it would not exist in its current form. GLA would be absolutely fine without BA engineering or GAMA. I really don't understand the point you are trying to make other than yet again jumping to the defence of the completely immune from criticism (in your eyes) Scottish government.

[Clive]

Clive I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. The Scottish government do subsidise PIK. If they had not, it would not exist in its current form. GLA would be absolutely fine without BA engineering or GAMA. I really don't understand the point you are trying to make other than yet again jumping to the defence of the completely immune from criticism (in your eyes) Scottish government.

The passage wasn’t about the Scot Gov subsidising PIK, it was about Bearsden highlighting the Ryanair ops were subsidised by military movements at PIK whereas we don’t normally consider cross subsidising across revenue streams at airport ops, but don’t worry about it.