To understand whether Manston would be viable, we need to look at the data produced by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and that produced by Dr Sally Dixon, which underpins the Development Consent Order (DCO) granted by the reserve Conservative Transport Secretary (TS). The actual TS had recused himself because he attended a rally in favour of the reopening on a prior occasion, which rather supports the arguments of my previous article about the extraordinary level of Conservative support for Manston as an airport.
CAA statistics
The CAA further defines an ATM as a landing or take-off of an aircraft engaged in the transport of passengers, cargo or mail on commercial terms
An assumption about the future growth in freighter ATMs is required to indicate the number of runway movements that might be required for non-passenger aircraft. Figure 3.8 in a CAA report shows the number of freighters using the airports included in the forecasting model over the period 1990 – 2011, and the 2011 total is LOWER than that of 1990.
Following a period of strong growth in the late 1990s usage of air freighters has been subdued, with a steady decline over the last decade. While some of this trend appears to be driven by an increase in the share of total freight carried as belly hold cargo and an increase in the payload per freighter, it has also coincided with a flattening of overall demand for air freight. Several reasons for this have been suggested, including:
Increased capacity and frequency of shipping services; aviation fuel
Prices rising faster than shipping fuel prices; disruption to air services (particularly on the North Atlantic routes) following the 2001 terrorist attack in New York; and the increasing importance of the Far East market.
Data on the demand for air freight
This forecast assumes that demand for air freight, the share of freight carried on dedicated cargo flights and the average payload of these flights will follow the average trend from 1990–2011. This results in a future projection for air freight ATMs that grows from 2011 outturn at an average rate of 0.4% a year according to CAA data quoted in Figure 3.8 p55 of a Dept. of Transport report Jan 2013 of Aviation, which shows the 2011 figure as LOWER than the 1995.
Since the forecast in 2013, the actual data (bar 2020 and 2021 covid years) has been as follows
Year Actual Air Traffic Movements
2013 56,693
2014 56,356
2015 57,197
2016 51,863
2017 52,330
2018 54,061
2019 57,535
2020 83,355
2021 92,997
2022 66,031
2023 57,239
2024 54000 (forecast as only data to October is currently available)
The CAA also measures the actual tonnage carried both in the belly of passenger planes and pure freighters.
Year Tonnage
2014 230,4487
2015 229,9343
2016 238,4407
2017 262,2496
2018 264,5709
2019 253,5422
2020 200,2186
2021 232,2602
2022 221,6835
2023 199,1931
2024 253,6049 (forecast)
In 2024, the forecast suggests freight has flatlined, with 85% of all freight being centred in the big three airports (Heathrow, Stanstead and East Midlands) which surround the main distribution hubs in the Midlands.
This leaves just 15% of freight for Manston to make inroads into (377,151 tonnes).
Forecasts on Manston as an airport for freight
At the public enquiry, Dr Sally Dixon produced forecasts to support her arguments for developing Manston as primarily an airport for freight. Her table appears in the executive summary on page 159 and the link to the original report is here.
The criteria for granting a DCO is achieving an additional 10,000 cargo ATMs which Dr Dixon says will happen in year six (10,144 ATMs and 181,436 tonnes) carrying just 18 tonnes per ATM. Historically, Manston flights arrived full (96 tonnes) and left empty.
It is hard to understand how, from start-up, in just six years they hope to capture 50% of the available market share assuming the big three English airports continue to capture 90% (in 2024) of the available market especially when RiverOak has ruled out cargo night flights (which are allowed at Stanstead and East Midlands) and have ruled out belly hold freight (in large passenger planes coming to Heathrow).
Viability or profitability?
To most people, viability means profitability, and that must be how Dr Dixon came to create her forecasts in the Azimuth report which, if you remember, underpins the DCO. So it was with a degree of shock that we learnt at the examination that Dr Dixon’s forecast isn’t based on profitability at all. Azimuth is DSD (Dr Sally Dixon).
This can be seen in the transcript from the public enquiry on 21.03.2019:
James Strawn, barrister (JS):
“Paragraph 9.35 of the planning statement tells the reader the Azimuth report considers whether reopening Manston Airport in the way intended by RiverOak is viable?”
“The Azimuth Associates report (Sally Dixon) contains a qualitative study of potential demand for Manston Airport as a freight hub for the South East of the UK with additional passenger and general aviation services. It considers whether reopening Manston Airport in the way intended by RiverOak would be Viable. This is an important consideration not only in light of the policy objectives set out in the APF and in demonstrating a need for the proposed development in the absence of any specific promotion through the Airports National Planning Statement but significantly when considering the implications of the DCO proposals on the spatial planning process within Thanet District Council and as part of its new Local Plan.
The council has recently voted and shown its support for the continued safeguarding of the Manston Airport site for aviation use. The Azimuth Associates report reinforces that there is a definite need for this in the local, regional, and national interest. Consequently, and in light of the Thanet District Council’s response to the June/July 2017 statutory consultation on the project, it is not considered that there is a general planning policy conflict when considering the proposals for development.”
The Azimuth report does not prove Manston Airport would be viable
JS “Right so. The Azimuth report tells the examining Authority and us whether or not reopening Manston Airport in the way intended is viable.”
JS “I’ll try it a different way. You have produced a forecast for the applicant to demonstrate both a need and the viability of that need. Haven’t you?”
DSD “No, I have produced a forecast and the viability was done separately”
JS “It is essential, isn’t it, for a forecast to be forecast to understand whether it is going to occur and consequently whether it’s viable? Correct?”
DSD “That is correct”
JS “Are you saying Dr Dixon that the Azimuth Report doesn’t do that exercise?”
DSD “As I’ve said the report provides the forecast the viability was assessed separately, I wasn’t asked to come up with a forecast which showed viability or not. I was asked to produce a forecast, whether it was viable or not was not in my hands”
JS “Dr Dixon I’m struggling to understand your answers. A forecast is a prediction of what will happen at Manston Airport and therefore for you to be telling the Examining Authority that this will happen or likely to happen you must think it viable mustn’t you?”
DSD “I disagree. I was asked to produce a forecast in terms of ATMs and tonnage. Whether that was viable is not part of the Azimuth Report.”
JS “So if the Examining Authority wanted to know if your report is likely to come about they will hunt in vain for that in the Azimuth Report? Is that correct?”
DSD “That is correct”
………
No profitable business plan
JS “It’s clear it isn’t in the summary of the business model for the reasons we discussed yesterday. That doesn’t tell you for example how the £306M (2025 that amount is £800M) is financed, the interest on it, what you are going to charge cargo Freighters in order to come from wherever they may be. None of that is contained in that material is it?”
The discussion then confirms that DSD cannot confirm that the Azimuth report has been costed nor that the forecast is viable.
I might also add as of late 2024 the sum involved has risen to £800M and to date there has yet to be a profitable business plan produced that would show how the Capital Expenditure would be returned to the investors (whoever they are).
I suspect this exchange was the main reason the Examining Authority and the Ove Arup report (commissioned by HMG) came to the conclusion not to grant the DCO.
The ExA Report concluded that the Applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient need for the Proposed Development, summarised in their Report of Findings and Conclusions:
“Given all the above evidence, the ExA concludes that the levels of freight that the Proposed Development could expect to handle are modest and could be catered for at existing airports (Heathrow, Stansted, EMA, and others if the demand existed). The ExA considers that Manston appears to offer no obvious advantages to outweigh the strong competition that such airports offer. The ExA therefore concludes that the Applicant has failed to demonstrate sufficient need for the Proposed Development, additional to (or different from) the need which is met by the provision of existing airports.” (E.R 5.7.28)
The overwhelming conclusion
Overall, the Independent Assessor concludes that there has not been any evidence presented in respect of the quantitative need case for the Proposed Development, nor significant or material changes to policy since July 2019 that would lead to different conclusions being reached (compared with the previous ExA conclusions) with respect to the need for the Manston development.
OVE ARUP final report 31 May 2022 (TR020002-006365) is one such report commission at a cost of £150K by the department of transport.
If that wasn’t enough, since 2011, there have been at least 12 specialist reports on Manston from aviation specialists and what they all have in common is they all believe that should the cargo hub open it would fail as it has on three occasions since 1998.
Editor’s Note: Since this article was submitted, the Chancellor has given the go-ahead for both the third runway at Heathrow and the second runway at Gatwick. Both are likely to hugely increase the freight-carrying capacity there. So what kind of business would want to route freight to Manston, further east, with poorer road connections inland?
