Home ... NNF ... Manston ... Thanet rejects Manston night flights

More than 2,000 residents air their views

More than 2,000 residents took the time to air their views as part of the council’s public consultation on proposals for regular night-time flying at Manston Airport. The majority were opposed to the implementation of regular night-time flying, with approximately 73% opposed, 26% in favour and 1% not clearly stating a position.

Thanet rejects Manston night flights

More than 2,000 residents air their views

More than 2,000 residents took the time to air their views as part of the council’s public consultation on proposals for regular night-time flying at Manston Airport. The majority were opposed to the implementation of regular night-time flying, with approximately 73% opposed, 26% in favour and 1% not clearly stating a position.

The main reasons given by those who were opposed were:

  • the likely disturbance to sleep
  • the effect on health and quality of life
  • unacceptable noise levels
  • the likely detrimental impact on the local economy
  • overstating the potential economic benefits.

Those in favour stated the reasons for their support as including:

  • jobs/employment opportunities
  • regeneration of Thanet
  • their desire for the airport to develop
  • night flights needed to ensure the future viability of the airport
  • Airport has been there for many years

The responses were also analysed by area to ensure that the council gathers the views of those who live under the identified flight path, those who live within Thanet and those from outside of Thanet.  The results were approximately as follows:



Leader of Thanet District Council, Cllr. Clive Hart, said:

“Firstly I’d like to thank everyone who took the time to take part in this consultation.  We know that it’s such an important issue for local people and that’s clearly reflected in the high level of response. The feedback from this consultation will now be considered by Councillors, alongside the findings of the Independent Assessment completed by Parsons Brinckerhoff and the proposed policy itself, to agree the council’s consultation response to Infratil.

I am sure every Councillor will be carefully analysing these results to see what residents have said, before we finalise our response.”

A report is due to be considered by members of the Airport Working Party on Wednesday 4th April. The report then goes to Scrutiny on Tuesday 24th April, Cabinet on Thursday 10th May and will then be considered at an Extraordinary meeting of Full Council on Thursday 24th May.

Check Also

That PwC report. At last! So what?

Well, what does a quick skip though the PwC report tell us? Er, well, it …

No comments

  1. Sadly they've been rubbing the lamp for years! It's certainly a pantomime.

  2. SleeplessinRamsgate

    Dear HBM, At the start of the consultation I wrote to Laura Sandys voicing my concerns. Ms Sandys then forwarded these concerns to TDC. Today I have received a reply from Ms Sandys, attaching the response from Barry Mileham, TDC's 'Business Information & Improvement Manager', dated 21st March 2012. Alarmingly it states:"Legal advice sought confirmed that the council's role in relation to Infratil's proposal was that of consultee only. As the council has no right to veto Infratil's adoption of a Night Flying Policy in terms of its Night Flying Policy Proposal but can only raise non binding objections on well founded grounds, the Leader took the decision that the expenditure required to undertake a more high profile marketing (?sic?) campaign was disproportionate in the current economic climate."This is deeply concerning on a number of levels:1) Should TDC's role have been to 'conduct a marketing campaign' for the introduction of night flights?2) The use of the phrase 'legal advice sought' makes it unclear who sought this advice – almost certainly the last TDC administration who were in favour of night flights, so what is the motivation of the current administration in hiding behind this, when they made it absolutely clear in their election manifesto that they would oppose night flights and seek planning permission as it represented a significant change of use? Anyone familiar with marketing will know that the client dictates the outcomes of such advice to a certain extent as they are paying for it. 3) It could be extremely useful for the Labour Group, newly in charge at TDC, to claim that the council has no say in this matter, i.e. "Despite our election manifesto stating we would not allow night flights, the report says we have no say, so we have not betrayed the electorate".This is plainly nonsense. If the current Section 106 had no power to stop night flights they would have started some time ago, without the need for any public consultation. If Infratil's lawyers, probably more competent and undoubtedly better funded than TDC's laywers, had thought they could have got away with introducing night flights without the consent of TDC, they would have done so a long time ago.A glance at Cllr David Green's (Labour) blog fom last year is elucidating: http://eastclifframsgate.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/labour-night-flights-resoution.htmlIf you scroll down to his response to one of the comments you will find:"What should have happened, and we have argued for years, is that the issues around the airport should have been dealt with through the Local Development Framework. Then, proper independent studies could have been comissioned into both potential economic benefit and deficit, and overall environmental impact.The TDC administration has failed Thanet by not doing this, and are allowing the developer to call the tune. Silly games are still being played by officers failing to follow the Council's constitution and interfering in the Scrutiny process to block debate over the narrow night flights issue. Labour has found itself, having a manifesto commitment to the proper control of night flights, being frustrated by unconstitutional trickery. Hence the resolution to Council. Anything else would be seen as breaking our election promises. I'm sure you would agree that promises made to the electorate at the election should be acted upon."13 June, 2011 09:42 How can this be reconciled with Barry Mileham's response?Even more sleepless now!

  3. Steve from Ramsgate

    Lets hope TDC now put a lid on this.

  4. i cant believe 10% of people under the flight path voted for night flights

  5. Interesting that the results from Thanet as a whole are much the same as those directly under the flightpath. I was kind of expecting there would be more in favour elsewhere in Thanet, because they can benefit from the supposed economic advantages while not suffering the environmental ones. Certainly I was presuming that this was what the previous council administration was banking on – that it would allow them to dress it up as an overall "yes" on the back of all the people from Margate etc.But it seems most people either understand the justified objection that those of us under the flight path have, or see through the stupidly inflated job creation figures. Either way the Labour council's decision to weight the consultation towards those under the flight path now looks like a mere formality,This looks like a pretty hard result to ignore. Question is what the legal way forward is now. I'm a bit confused about how the council are only "advising" and their judgment is not legally binding. What IS legally binding then? Is it now down to the need for planning permission for change of use?

  6. I agree. It is interesting that the consultation revealed that the opposition to night-flights extends well beyond the flight paths. Curious then, that Mr. Buchanan has stated that the airport's own consultation exercise produced a result that suggested 80% of people were in favour of night-flights. How can this be? One consultation says that 73% of people are against. Another consultation says that 80% of people are in favour. I can understand a few morons believing that night-flights are a good thing, but I really can't believe that 80% of people are that stupid. One possible explanation would be that the sample size wasn't large enough to give a representative result. However, the numbers of people responding were substantial; certainly a lot more than would have been sampled by a polling organisation like MORI. We know that the Council's consultation was run properly, with all residents given the opportunity to respond, and responses vetted by cross-checking names and post-codes against the electoral register. The airport's consultation was not run properly. Their flyer was only delivered to selected areas and we don't know what checking (if any) was done. Under the circumstances, I think it's fair to say that the airport's consultation exercise was flawed and the results do not give a reliable guide to public opinion.

  7. Igloo. Respect, as George, would say for your confidence in the handling of the consultation. It doesn't matter how often this is claimed to be the case, many key community groups under the flight-path were NOT communicated with nor did any of the resident's who had been promised communications receive this at home, unlike Manston's colourful airport insert in the widely circulated free newspaper. Worse still the Council was unable to put the basic facts before the electorate, relying on people ploughing through documents that many of the councillors don't even understand themselves, which I suppose is not unexpected considering the lack of intelligence, education, experience, care for the community and professionalism that some councillors show with appalling regularity.Both consultations were flawed, and for a few weeks with the links on the TDC web-site they were the SAME consultaion that was flawed.Unless there is a thorough audit made available to the public of the so-called TDC Night-time Flights Consultation, it remains an unreliable charade. We should be able to see the same information here as Canterbury CC published for it's residents. Anything less is unacceptable and frankly leaves the party in control of the Council and it's officers open to serious questioning and as the manufacturers of unreliable evidence at the public expense no matter how cheap it was.Sorry Igloo, for a moment there I thought I was talking to a Labour Councillor!

  8. Get real, 80% of people want a successful airport and really don't give a toss about those of you who CHOSE to live on the flightpath. And taken against the total population of Thanet your anti figures look pretty p*ss-poor.

  9. Oh Dear your proberbly right about 80% of Thanet would like a successful airport, but you have to realise "it just aint gonna happen" how long have they been trying, to long is the answer, it's about time your good self & the rest of Thanet decided what to do with the site to create employment for the people of Thanet instead of wasting time trying the impossible, had the purchasers of Manston believed in the airport they would have done the same as Edie Stobart did @ Southend airport [& if you don't know go on line & check it for your self ], also with the coming of the Thames Estuary airport [ & it will happen ] Manston has no chance, this is why Infratil are selling up, so come on stop this stupid time wasting writing stupid coments on here & get it sorted.

  10. Strange I see things as 80% of the Herne bay and Thanet population couldn't give a flying toss if Manston crashes and burns!! If they wanted a thriving airport then where are all the Pro Airport consultation entries to Thanet Council??I live off the flight line and have more faith in DIsney Land being built on Mars than Manston being any use as an employer or benefit to Kent. This part of the world relies on it's natural beauty for jobs, take that away and thousands will be at the dole queue.

  11. It is now more than ten years since Manston was privatised. At that time, the Council took a fateful decision. They didn't ask the people about it. They took it on our behalf. They decided that it had to remain as an airport. Had they not taken this decision, other potential users could have put in bids for the 700 acre site and we might, by now, have had a thriving hub of job creation. Before Oh Dear weighs in with the inevitable b*llsh*t claim that nothing else could possibly go there let's have a look at what might be on the table:A new prison was proposed. I believe this was blocked by our useless MP's. Prisons may not be very palatable institutions but they sure as heck create jobs and a new one is desperately needed. Could Oh Dear tell us whether he would accept this idea or is he against jobs?A factory for manufacturing wind-turbines. By all accounts, Thanet wasn't in the running for this 1000 job project, because we couldn't provide a suitable site. I would have thought Manston was ideal, with easy access to the port and good links to the continent where much of the engineering expertise is coming from.A hoilday park. With the end of cheap flights and the new economic reality, British people are looking for British holidays. They don't want Butlins. They want self-contained chalet accomodation with a range of leisure activities within easy reach. In Thanet, we have the best weather in the UK, access to sandy beaches, a great network of walking and cycling trails, Ramsgate harbour which, on a good day, surpasses most resorts in the South of France What we desperately need is investment in swimming pools and sports' facilities. How much longer is this going to be allowed to continue before the penny drops? The airport isn't working and it isn't going to work. Over-reliance on the airport development has stifled economic development in Thanet for more than ten years and nobody has been allowed even to talk about plan B. We've had two owners and several airlines. None of them have been able to make it work. The Council should be making it clear to potential investors that they are prepared to welcome and accept alternative proposals for the site.

  12. Affordable accomodation, residential, sheltered and holiday are desperately needed: with leisure facilities!And trees, trees, trees, trees… this area was wooded!

  13. Just doing some back of the envelope calculations. For the cost of building Boris Island, I estimate that you could purchase 150,000 houses (at London prices). It seems to me that many of the environmental problems associated with expanding Gatwick could be alleviated if this sort of sum of money was used to purchase the worst affected properties and to compensate people who are adversely affected. They seem to be very happy to slosh around billions of pounds of public money to build a new airport, but they don't seem to be willing to spend a penny on recompense for local people. Presumably, this is because the billions spent on construction go into the pockets of people who give money to the Tory party, who then stash this money offshore to avoid paying tax. Money given to the unwashed masses just gets spent on luxuries like mortgages, food, clothing and tuition fees. I'm thinking that part of the answer here lies in how to best provide a boost to the economy. Do you think it's best to give billions of pounds to rich developers or do you think it would be best to spread it around a bit?

  14. Mrs Gabriel is not only a cross dresser but as I've mentioned before he/she/it has now confirmed that he/she/it is also a tree hugger. And Mr Igloo, how was it you managed to miss out the fact that Cleanaway are keeping a close eye on the situation? Should things go miserable for the airport, they are still looking for somewhere to site the incinerators that were originally going to be sited near Faversham. Personally I would have rather have a a few seconds of aircraft noise than be slowly poisoned.

  15. Oh Dear,Your feeble attempt at humour only serves to expose the sheer extent of your ignorance and hypocrisy. I don't deny that incinerators produce toxic emissions, but you appear to be under the illusion that the airport is some sort of green option. Nothing could be further from the truth. Recent developments in technology have allowed researchers to better monitor the airborne pollution levels at airports. The results are very worrying with levels of toxic nanoparticles and carcinogens at dangerous levels whenever jet engines are running. In a test case, in Denmark, it has now been accepted that airport workers, who have been exposed to fumes from jet engines, are entitled to claim compensation for the cancer which ensues.

  16. Here we go, the chemtrail crowd pop up from behind their beleagured parapet. Think you're a bit off topic Mr Igloo, I thought the title of this thing was No Night Flights? This woman is no doubt one of yours? Have fun.

  17. A new prison? A factory for manufacturing wind-turbines? You have conveniently forgotten the Pfizer site

  18. Slipway Bobs mate

    Oh Dear How nice that you mention Pfizers, perhaps you share a common problem with Manston, that they are not the only ones not able to get one up in the early hours. Perhaps you should keep on taking the pills please consider/start taking the pills.

  19. Oh dears mate

    Oh dear works at the airport

  20. With regards to the serious lack of jobs in Thanet, mass youth unemployment and the fact that half my street now speaks Polish inside two years!?? Don't get me wrong, I like my Polish neighbors very much BUT If there's such a shortage of jobs in Thanet, why would the council let this happen? Something has gone very wrong.Also I would like to work in London using our new HS1 line, sadly a weekly commute to London is impossible unless you have a huge wage to go with it! Bring down the cost of the 1 hour daily commute and Thanet will start to grow green shoots.

  21. "why would the council let this happen?" because they listen to the handful of empty vessels that frequent this site and kick up more racket than any passing 747 instead of listening to the real people of Thanet

  22. Mrs A MQueen

    Real people eh, as opposed to a virtual bully like you Oh Dear?

  23. Local business woman

    Did I miss something? I thought the real people of Thanet just said "no" to night flights? If I thought for a second that TDC read this site and took serious account of the genuine and well-researched concerns that people post here, I would sleep a little better in my bed.

  24. No the real people of Thanet are already totally behind the airport and anything that it does, the rowdy rabble who post here couldn't give a monkeys for anything other than themselves

  25. Oh Dear your assertions are utterly laughable.

  26. Ah, here we go again. "The real people of Thanet." So who are these people? I remember having a discussion with a councillor who was of the opinion that people who had lived here all their lives should have a greater say than newcomers (this isn't a joke. It's absolutely true). I asked him how long I had to live here before I could have a say. Funny enough, he didn't have an answer, but I do.Anyone who pays their Council tax has an equal say. If this isn't the case, then those whose views are ignored are entitled not to pay. No taxation without representation. As you all know, our "special" friend doesn't use his real name because he hasn't lived here very long and has no legitimate claim to be the mouthpiece of "The real people of Thanet."

  27. I have an M.P. (and some councillors) who sometimes claim to speak for the silent majority. This ploy is the last resort of the intellectually dishonest and self-important scoundrels who parasitise our democracy. Most 10 year-olds could point out the flaw: if they're silent, how do you know what they want, and how do you know it's exactly the same as what you want?

  28. Your assumption that I haven't lived here long is total bo**ocks. It's you middle class NIMBY's who have moved in from the smoke to take advantage of the cheap housing and then (because you chose to ignore your solicitors advice) you discover that (shock, horror) you are under or close to the flightpath of an airport that's been here since 1916 where aircraft come and go (yes really!) you arrogantly think that you have some sort of right to start protesting and even suggesting that the whole place should be ploughed up and turned into some sort of holiday camp or prison. What a pathetic bunch of people you are! The solution though is really quite simple, either shut up or clear off back to where you came from and leave it to those of us (the vast majority) who do support the airport.

  29. Restless in Ramsgate

    Oh Dear, how relentlessly unpleasant you seem to be. It seems pointless addressing your tirade as you don't seem to listen to any of the cogently argued responses to any of your posts. However, you really do need to pay attention to the way democracy works. Unlike Australia, where voting is compulsory, the UK operates with a national electoral system that invites people to express their views at the ballot box. It requires that people get off their sofas and go to the polling station. Views that are not expressed are not counted. In the consultation conducted on night flights, the public were similarly invited to express their views. They did. Resoundingly. In fact, this was the largest response to a consultation the council has ever had, it seems. So it's pointless really wittering on about people who didn't express a view. This consultation was publicised, open and allowed more than a simple 'yes' or 'no' in that it invited detailed comments that have been recorded. It's clear that the vast majority do not want night flights for a range of very good reasons. If the council chose to ignore these results, it would place them in a very sticky position with regard to any future consultation carried out on exactly the same basis.

  30. 700 represents a p*ss poor response. The majority of those who responded were self-selected. If, as should have happened, a market-research company been brought in to carry out a PROPER survey then we all know what the results would have been. Unfortunately your tub thumping claptrap in all of this has been detrimental to your cause as you will soon find out. Have a lovely Easter![HBM: 700 what? EVERYONE who responded to this survey was self-selected. On the other hand, MORI would start with a "random, representative" sample, but would only get replies from those who wanted to spend time talking to a stranger on the phone. We DON'T know what the result of any other survey might have been, but we DO know the result of this one. You seem to be the only one who can't deal with it. I suggest you send your thoughts to Cllr Hart at TDC, where they might change the process, rather than putting them here, where they just get mocked or ignored.]

  31. Oh Dear. So, now we have it. Only a market research company is able to ascertain the public mood. What total rubbish. The whole reason we have councillors is to reflect the public mood and to make decisions accordingly. Your sour grapes and increasingly aggressive responses indicate to me that you know you have lost the argument and the vote. So, what will you do now? Stay in a town that isn't battered by aircraft noise (as you wanted) with neighbours you clearly hate, because they are too intelligent to be controlled by your hollow rhetoric; or will you move elsewhere? I'll be happy to come round and help you load your stuff into the removal van.

  32. Maybe I should move next door to you Mr Igloo and park my ice creal van right across your driveway.HBM As you pointed out, an organisation like Ipsos MORI would take a random, representative sample which means taking an UNBIASED random selection of individuals from the community which, as an expert on these things, I'm sure you will agree is the only FAIR way of doing it. By the way maybe I should directing my comments to Bob Bayford who is also of the opinion that the results of this survey are "skewed".

  33. A middle class nimby

    Oh dear, keep on spouting threats like you think you know what's going to happen next.I'd say the only thing that has rung true from either the supporters or non-supporters of Manston in the 4 years I have been here is the airports failure. I think that has been a pretty consistent message coming from anyone with a basic understanding of business (which does not include TDC or KCC.)Infratil backed the wrong horse. They are now stuck with two lame duck uk airports they are trying to sell which have better value airports for sale in the same region. They have realised this and are making a "no regrets" decision to sell. That's a great endorsement for any potential buyer. Are buyers queuing around the block? I'd say no, which is probably a more informed and likely outcome than your bluster and bullshit threats of impending doom from some white knight operator who only wants to fly when it's dark.Hope you find another job when it closes dear oh dear, but remember that real businesses employ people with business sense, not delusional views of reality.

  34. An employer in an interview said

    "…..so oh dear, you own an ice cream van, yet you are sat inside on a sunny day making weak arguments for a flawed business. Don't waste my time. Get out."

  35. "Are buyers queuing around the block? I'd say no." Keep wishing and hoping but sadly for you and your tribe there is no happy ending. Look out for the A319/320s coming soon!

  36. Boris Johnson's white hair

    With all these arguments going on about south east runway capacity over the past few months, it's interesting to see how many times Manston comes up as a potential solution by people other than Roger Gale or Paul Carter.None.Any potential buyers will be looking at the wider situation and thinking "do I buy a thrice failed airport at the end of the road in Kent against a backdrop of potential increased runway capacity 100 miles up the road at Heathrow, with 50% capacity at Stansted, with a new runway pencilled in at Gatwick in 7 years time, with Southend attracting two major airlines, with City expanding, with Luton expanding……."I'll ring my mate oh dear and get his opinion. He knows what he's talking about.

  37. We've already announced our summer schedule for 2012, and so have all of our competitors. I can't image any other operator is going to launch the northern-Europe to med workhorse in winter, so maybe oh dear has his malfunctioning crystal ball looking to summer 2013 for this a319/320 passenger operator that is going to fy through the night.Or maybe he is just knows nothing.

  38. Here's a clue, there might just be an F missing from my last post. Maybe he might just know something eh?

  39. I'm off to the beer festival now where no doubt I will observe you demonstrating more loutish behaviour than normal. Don't forgot your hydrometer and to wear your no night flights t-shirt

  40. Restless in Ramsgate

    Oh dear Oh Dear, please do direct your comments to Bob Bayford regarding 'skewed' results. Maybe you could, in discussion with him, address the points I raised about the way democracy works in this country that you have failed to come back to. Of course, I recognise that you don't 'respond' to comments in any real sense but rather continue to rant along your own well-worn lines. However, do you find fault with the current electoral system? I'd be interested to know your views on proportional representation. Do you think we should have MORI take a representative sample of people and then form a national government on that basis? On what basis do you believe the results to be 'skewed'? No, don't bother, I'll take a leaf out of your book and put my fingers in my ears. (Lala la la la la) No, sorry, I can't do it – I'm afraid I have to actually use all my faculties and listen, think, reflect, analyse, synthesise and come to my own view and then go on repeating that cycle. So, finally, as you have been asked repeatedly – provide some evidence, any evidence (not your rantings or I reckons) to make me think again, to make me change my mind. I'll look at any real evidence. Really.

  41. I really couldn't care less which is much the same attitude directed by you lot at anyone or anything connected with the airport. A skewed survey is a skewed survey fullstop

  42. careless of Thanet

    Oh DearWe already have a survey/report (for what its worth), is their a similarity here 'worth' and is responding to a worth-less, oh dear I think their is!

  43. Stelios's mate

    So oh dear, are you suggesting there is a freight operator using the a319/a320 freighter version? Tell us more please oh wise one. After a few pints of Gadds finest, you might start to make more sense.

  44. Ramsgate resident

    Just remember everyone there is a airport sale process going on. Councillors read this website, and some buffoon suggesting a new operator is around the corner gets the rumour mill turning. Charlie will then say Infratil will put the airport into mothballs for 30 years unless they get their way. It's all part of a game, and Charlie will think he knows how to play it better than everyone else.Oh dear, believe it or not, is a part of that overall process. Rumour, false accusations, total untruths, all to get people questioning totally damning consultation evidence.Charles Buchanan cannot run his own consultation. It's the council consulting, and they should have received the responses. If Charlie's follower are too stupid to send a copy to the council, why should their votes be counted?Same reason no night flights could not hand in the thousands of signature petition against night flights. It's not going to be accepted. Who is to as that Charlie's supporters have already written into TDC and their numbers have been counted?Be strong everyone, continue to bat off the nonsense and remember to make sure your councillors see what's really going on and what people think.

  45. Straw poll conducted yesterday with 100 randomly selected Thanet council taxpayers.For night flights 68%Against: 25%Not bothered/interested: 7%The only proper way to conduct a survey, ask the real people[HBM: laughable]

  46. Probably a truer reflection of the way Thanet feels. Go do it yourself without any of your usual rabble rousing and I can guarantee you will be unpleasantly shocked.

  47. *yawn* Be very careful what you wish for

  48. Stelios's mate

    Who is operating these cargo flights then oh dear, almanac of everything Manston?

  49. He can't tell you because he doesn't know anything. He's just an internet troll who can't accept the facts.

  50. Is that the sound of twin CFM56s I hear . . . . .

  51. The problem you have (Oh Dear) is that the airport leaks like a sieve when it comes to information. The grease monkeys drinking in Manston tell the parka-brigade who can't wait to get back to goad their neighbours with stories of impending business. Inevitably, loud-mouths like yourself feel the need to post the information to the first available bulletin board in an attempt to make you appear well-informed. And the sad fact (for you) is that there are, currently, no credible rumours doing the rounds. Look on Pprune. Loads of stories about other airports but diddly-squat about Manston. As you know, Pprune is inhabited by insiders and anything that's made up quickly gets shot down in flames. That's why your posting your silly innuendo here and not there. Nothing's coming to Manston. I mean who would be stupid enough to relocate their business to an airport that the owners are trying to sell?

  52. PRUNE is so yesterday lovey. The reason no one posts there anymore is because of the management's warning. I don't have to trawl through rumour sites for my info

  53. So a dedicated freighter a319/320 using manston. Who could that be?Would this user make a material impact on the huge losses made by manston each year?Why would management tell employees not to spread rumour, then do exactly that himself?Lipstick on the pig perhaps? Dressing up to make her more saleable? I suppose if there is any new operator the question will be if it stops the parent pulling out when a buyer fails to come forward.

  54. So infratil, struggling to attract business to manston, suddenly get more than one operator using a319/320 to do business with just after they announce they want to sell the airport. Surely they'll be changing their mind?

  55. Now, you know me, I like to keep you informed with what's happening at your friendly local airport. Seems the new owners have cash to splash and are appointing an Airport Operations Manager for the "next stage" of Manston's development. Suggestions that the airport's death is imminent have been a little premature don't you think?[HBM: in Dec 2011 the airport owners splashed out on moving a top-notch (?) freight development manager down to Manston, but this didn't signal a great new future… months later the airport was put up for sale.http://www.hernebaymatters.com/nonightflights-blog/man-moves-house-manston-issues-press-release.htmlI think you'll find the "Airport Operations Manager" is actually a corporate undertaker, with responsibility for disposing of the remains.]

  56. "A spotter" The answer is don't think so

  57. Someone in the real world

    "Suggestions that the airports death is imminent have been a little premature don't you think?"It's been on life support every day of its existence. An operations manager, along with all of the other fanfare'd hires over the years have not made a blind bit of difference. Its been a long, painful illness. You wouldn't let a dog suffer like Manston would. Infratil will do the humane thing sooner rather than later.

  58. Olympic Tourist

    I'm thinking of flying into Manston for the olympics. Reading its brochure, it says this;"A high speed rail link from Ramsgate Station (located a short 5 minutes taxi ride from the airport) connects the airport to The Olympic Park in Stratford, in just 1 hour and 15 minutes."However, reading south eastern's website says trains aren't running directlly from Ramsgate to Stratford – you've got to change onto a limited shuttle service at Ashford, making the journey about 2 hrs. Are Manston telling porkies, overselling themselves?

  59. Trolling

  60. Maybe I'll regret selling manston………………but I doubt it.

  61. Oh Dear, Oh DearWhat a spivs mate you are, you are?

  62. Trolling

  63. I am assuming you have now decided to take some action against Oh Dear by deleting his comments and substituting Trolling in its place. This is getting to be very tedious. To be honest I would rather like to hear what he has to say. He certainly livens up what at times can be a very anal website and, before you all jump down my throat, let me just say that I am totally on your side but I think this person whoever he is should be allowed to speak, if anything your actions show you more in a bad light than him.[HBM: Hmmm, a comment sent via a hide-your-tracks internet anonymisation service… Oh well, let's assume you're not Oh Dear… If he makes a useful contribution to the discussion, I shall leave his comments in place, even if I disagree with them. If he is making no useful contribution or just being abusive or offensive, I shall flag his comments as trolling. If you particularly enjoy Oh Dear's comments, perhaps he would be kind enough to tell us which other websites he leaves comments on, and then you could go there and read the whole lot, trolling and all.]

  64. As somebody who suffered from a particularly nasty case of cyber crime, I choose now to be safe use an anonymisation service as you describe it, not that it's any business of yours. I haven't got a clue where else Oh Dear posts and personally couldn't care less and neither could I care less about your campaign because of the attitude you have demonstrated here today. Having said that I hope you win[HBM: I too have been on the receiving end of cybercrime, and you have my sympathies. CyberGhost works best if you use it consistently – you forgot to on this comment. I'm sorry you're miffed (not my intention), but thank you for your good wishes.]

  65. Hi Trotter. If you go and enrol for Manston Movements, you can read uncensored comments by Oh Dear and all of his anorak-clad mates. Unfortunately, you won't find his comments over there nearly as exciting as the ones he posts here, because Manston Movements is inhabited by airport fanatics. Unfortunately for Oh Dear, this means he has to post the truth. Otherwise they rubbish what he has posted. Consequently, you will find no trace of the garbage he has been posting here about a forthcoming freight operator using "A319/320" aircraft or the "sound of CFM56" engines. No, on Manston Movements all you will hear from old big-mouth is the sound of silence, because he doesn't have any inside information.

  66. Trolling

  67. Seems that I am not even being given the right of reply now even though Igloo has made a false accusation against me. Please yourself but . . . .

  68. Right to write

    You are a psuedonym posting untruths against the aims of this blog.Go start your own for you and your 3 followers if you want your 'right' to respond.

  69. Correct, except the untruths. Airfield Operations Manager appointment, A319/320Fs, new owners. Just wait and see.

  70. You haven't posted this on Manston Movements because it isn't true. P.S. Pseudonyms don't have a right of reply.

  71. Just wait at see Ms

  72. How long do we have to wait? I don't need you to get it right to the nearest minute but a ballpark figure would do. May, June, this year, next year, 2020 ???

  73. I will leave you hanging there a bit longer Mrs Igloo and whatever other pseudonyms you also post under

  74. Oh and whilst you are there let me dangle this in front of you: The airport is in the next phase of development and as a result there is a need for a newly created Airport Operations Manager. Notice the words "next phase" – see I did warn you but read it quickly because no doubt the word Trolling will appear in its place shortly, after all you wouldn't want the followers to think that I might actually really know something about what's going on

  75. Does that mean that you will lose your job Oh Dear?Does it mean that Allan McQuarrie will lose his job?When and where is the operations manager job to be advertised?These are straightforward questions Oh Dear to which you are able to give a simple informative reply.

  76. Not sure after all the abuse I should make life that easy for you, however you do have one friend – Google.It would be totally unfair of me to speculate on who stays or goes.

  77. I'm afraid, Oh Dear, that you are a liar. A bare-faced liar. I gave you the opportunity to provide us with a shred of evidence for your claims. I asked you to tell us how long we would have to wait for the announcement. You couldn't do this because there is no announcement. You have just invented this because you are an internet troll.

  78. Steady there old fella, you'll end up bursting your bag. I would duck now there'an awful lot of albumen about to descend.

  79. I forgot of course you're not a bloke though are you. I think you once said that pseudonym's have no right of reply what are you going to do about the various one's you post under here?

  80. Stuff this up your rrrr's, moaning Tories, twit head holiday makers, deaf, dumb and blind trolls!Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, why is Manston never considered instead of a third runway? You have a ready-made runway at Manston, which is easy to get to from Dover. It has a lot of advantages and I do not understand why it could not be used.Earl Attlee: My noble friend makes a good point. Manston's runway is very long indeed, but it is also a long way from London and does not meet many of the requirements for a hub airport.14 May 2012 : Column 132 Hansard

  81. So it doesn't matter how long it is, if it's in the wrong place it's useless!

  82. Just come out of hibernation have we? As I'm sure you're aware, even in the wrong place it can be an infinite source of pleasure, and in this case for thousands of people. I would climb back in your nest if I were you because you ain't going to like what's coming!

  83. You keep going on about what's coming, but you're lying. Nothing is coming. You are just a lying troll.

  84. I can understand some people not wanting night flights,but not airport expansion.Manston could have expanded at anytime on the military or civilian side,so whos fault is it if you didnt take that into account when chooseing to live anywhere near an airport that has been there as long as Manston and has a dirty great runway you cant exactly miss.No ones fooled by this just being about night flights as we all know that for several years now Thanets moaners have been saying we dont want to close the airport down.Maybe some dont,while outhers among them certainly do by trying to put so many restrictions on it that it fails to produce the jobs we should all be seeking.These people have one advantage in that they stick together as a group while vast numbers of airport supporters just sit back and let the moaners beat them every time,This wont stop at night flights,not when members of the old Manston Airport Group are stll lurking around, dressed up as a clown right in there with the so called no night flight protesters.I know all you anti airporters want to save us all,but why is it most of you still have the cheek to fly at all its just so hypocritical.Facts figures,who the hell do some of these anti everythink people think they are moving to Thanet,or chooseing to live near an airport and then trying to stop just about anythink that could attempt to put money into an area that has been poor so long its a wonder we are still on the map.Iv heard things like lazy uneployed,get a job etc directed at the unemployed and you know more ofton than not its coming out of the mouths of the ones who do there upmost to stop just about anythink that would produce those jobs,Maybe one day these people will produce the jobs to replace the ones they do there upmost to wreak ,but i doubt it.Yes i do live in Ramsgate within hafe a mile of the airport which by the way i dont work for.

  85. 747What a load of muddled nonsense your comment contains!

  86. In what way A ?or our you that dull and boreing youve nothink to say

  87. You've raised an interesting point 747, although I think you'll find that it's actually the other way around. The pro-night flight nimby callers have been trying to label the NNF group campaign as just anti-Manston, anti-jobs etc etc. I know of at least 50 residents personally who signed up against night flights. At a recent unrelated meeting, the Manston topic came up, these very same people voiced their unreserved support of an expansion of daytime operations at Manston.And yes we all live directly under the Ramsgate flight path!

  88. "You keep going on about what's coming, but you're lying. Nothing is coming. You are just a lying troll." Seems like you're record's got stuck Mrs. You really are going to look incredibly stupid soon. Enjoy your weekend

  89. Local business woman

    I am struck by the aggressiveness in the comments by some (not all) of those who think that night flights will save the airport. Oh Dear doesn't want a prosperous airport, or, if he/she does, there has been precious little said about how night flights would help achieve that. Oh Dear's contribution seems to focus on wishing the worst, noisiest operation possible on local residents, whether or not this would bring any economic benefit. I can't think how this would benefit the area in any way. I'm assuming by the tone of Oh Dear's comments that Oh Dear has something personal to lose should Manston cease to operate as an airport. I accept that redundancy is seldom good news, but I don't know many people who get their kicks by threatening thousands of people with noisy, sleepless nights. Oh Dear, if you have some useful facts to offer about the airport's future, those of who are for the creation of local jobs would love to hear about it. The threats and nastiness do Infratil no favours.On a separate thread, I note that Infratil has written down the book value of Manston yet again. They now hold Manston and Prestwick together for around 34m. With no profits at the airport at all, this suggests a sale price at something very like what they bought it for 6 years ago. This supports the market whispers that there's very little interest in Manston as an airport. So, what next?

  90. On 6th April Oh Dear posted the following:"..sadly for you and your tribe there is no happy ending. Look out for the A319/320s coming soon! "It is now six weeks since he posted this pack of lies. As this represents incontrovertible proof that he is just a lying troll can the adminstrators of the site now ban him?

  91. "the market whispers?" Where is this market that's whispering? Do you mean the Cliftonville farmers market? "Very little interest?" OK, if you say so.Igloo, the word "soon" seems to send you into some sort of frenzy. "Soon" is when it happens and that will be er well "soon."

  92. Local business woman

    Sorry, Oh Dear, I should have been more clear. I'm reasonably well-connected to the world of private equity and corporate finance. When I say "the market" I'm talking about banks and funds based here in the UK with a global mandate as well as the professional firms that advise them. I don't really cover the private investor world though so I don't hear a lot from that sector.What's the source of your info?

  93. Oh Dear what can the matter be?Manston is all quiet on Saturday,He can't explain why that should be,He thinks it's busy up there."Soon is when it happens" – do us afavour and ban this lying troll.

  94. lbw: The horses stable lad.Igloo: I suggest you see someone before you do something silly

  95. By the way, IGlue, is that the same quiet Manston that has had at least 24 movements today?[HBM: 23 of them Military]

  96. Statistician

    Dear OD, 24 bowel movements by job seeking redundant staff!

  97. It's not going to happen, quite the opposite but what a nasty thing to say.