Some Information on London Manston for those who don’t know much on the area, and for those interested.
Manston was originally an RNAS Unit. The airfield is one of the oldest still open. It passed to the RAF, on its formation in 1918, reaching a peak strength of 2500 personnel and an area of 650 acres.
Following the First World War, Manston became the RAF School of Technical Training as well as the base for various Squadrons and other units.
The second conflict once again found Manston deeply involved in the defence of the country, suffering from enemy attacks and providing shelter and facilities for all kinds of aircraft.
In the Fifties the USAF took over, with their fighter/bomber Squadrons, to play their part in NATO. Since then Manston has developed a civil presence whilst still carrying out its RAF role.
One of the first airlines to operate from London Manston was Air Ferry, from 1963 to 1968.
Air Ferry was a British airline flying inclusive tour holiday charters between the UK and Europe. It was based at RAF Manston on the south-east coast. It was owned by Leroy Tour Limited and flew IT tours solely for this holiday company.
The airline began scheduled services to the European mainland and began with a Vickers Viking 1b twin, with another four joining the fleet later.
First Viking 1B twins were used in the early 1960s to fly charters and regional services.
Vickers Viking 1B G-AIVF at Dusseldorf in 1962.
The airline also purchased an ex-military C-54 (Douglas DC-4) and two Douglas DC-6 aircraft.
An ATL-98 Carvair car and outsize load transport was acquired in the early 1960s.
The parent company (Leroy Tours) was sold to Air Holdings in 1964 and this changed things for Air Ferry. The airline moved from RAF Manston to London Gatwick.
By 1967 the airline was using a turboprop Viscount 812 in a new livery but based in part on the Viking livery. Further Viscounts followed in 1968.
Vickers Viscount 812 at Gatwick in circa 1968.
Another Airline that began operations from Manston was Invicta. Invicta Air Cargo was a British independent airline and began freight charter flights in 1964 with a fleet of three Vickers Viking 1B twins out of RAF Manston in eastern England.
Vickers 639 Viking 1B G-AHOY at Manston in 1969.
Due to the two British state airlines monopolizing the scheduled passenger market Invicta, like all independents of the time, was forced into the less profitable markets of passenger charters and cargo.
By the late 1960s Invicta had replaced these very old airliners with ex-military Douglas C-54 freighters for its cargo charter business. By 1970 Invicta Air Cargo had a small fleet of C-54 freighters.
Douglas C-54/DC-4 G-ASEN in 1969.
Invicta also introduced the turbo-prop Viscount 755 typein the mid 1960s in an effort to break into the inclusive-tour passenger charter market and on ad-hoc passenger charters. The aircraft came from the fleet of British Eagle Airways and the livery reflected this airline’s own markings. These operations were not successful at that time and were suspended.
Viscount 700 series G-AOCB at Manston in 1968.
In October 1970 the airline purchased a turboprop Vickers Vanguard freighter (G-AXNT) from Air Holdings Ltd and found that the Vanguard was perfect for its operations and would be an ideal airliner for passenger work.
In 1971, Invicta change names, and became Invicta International, and the airline purchased a further two Vanguards from the Air Canada fleet via Air Holdings. These were to be used to re-start passenger charter flights rather than for freight work. Further Vanguards would follow in the early 1970s.
Cargo Vanguard G-AYFN at Tennerife in 1974.
With the re-start of its inclusive-tour and ad-hoc passenger operations the airline renamed itself Invicta International. The two passenger Vanguards were based at London-Luton airport, then home to other holiday airlines like Monarch and Britannia.
The Vanguards came from the Air Canada fleet and wore a modified livery based on the previous owners. This livery became well known as the main Invicta livery due to the growing fleet of Vanguards the airline operated.
Passenger charters were wide and varied. French students were flown from Le Bourget to the UK during the summer holidays to learn English. Catholic pilgrims were flown to Lourdes and Tarbes in France.
Invicta International won a ministry of Defence trooping contract in 1972 and carried troops and military cargo to British bases overseas. These were in addition to summer holiday charters, mainly to Spanish resorts from Luton, Manchester, Liverpool, Blackpool Tees-side and Gatwick.
To support this summer work another two Vanguards enter fleet service during 1972. During the winter months the aircraft were utilised on cheap day-trips from Bristol to Munich and Basle.
1973 saw the airline suffer serious financial problems. The Vanguard fleet was re-possessed by Air Holdings. After re-financing the airline re-started operations with five Vanguards, one of which was destroyed with loss of all on board when approaching Basle airport in poor weather.
Cargo flights also resumed with freight charters from Manston to Europe, the Middle East and Africa. A leased Bristol Britannia was used briefly in 1975.
Jet passenger operations were started using Boeing 720 jets by 1975 although the fleet was once again grounded on 26 October 1975 due again to financial problems. The Vanguards were sold to French operator Europe Aero Service (EAS) and flew in basic Invicta livery for that carrier.
Once again the airline was re-financed although the fleet of Vanguards were finally gone. A limited cargo only operation began in December 1975 using a leased British Air Ferries ATL-98 Carvair freighter.
By February 1976 two Bristol Britannia aircraft had been introduced and a widened service was undertaken. Ex-Monarch Airlines Britannia G-ANCF is shown below in freighter configuration. Operations with the Britannias included cattle and horses to Europe and North Africa.
The airline sought out what work it could find for the Britannias. The airline even leased the aircraft out to other carriers at times.
By 1981 Invicta International was operating only one Britannia freighter. It was leased out to IAC Cargo Airlines of Zaire in 1981 and on its return Invicta International came to an end.
London Manston Airport is the UK’s newest civilian airport and the country’s fastest growing freight airport. Its excellent geographical position means it is 80 miles from London, 20 miles from the Channel Tunnel and just 15 miles from the Port of Dover. The Airport is undergoing significant investment by its owners The Wiggins Group Plc who have just released a masterplan of proposed investment and development. Over the next 10 years, passenger traffic is predicted to rise to 4 million passengers a year.
Manston Runway — very Basic, but is long enough for a jumbo to land on, Virgin Atlantic sometimes bring down a 747 to practise in.
Today Manston copes with quite a few Cargo Flights coming in and out, Mostly operated by 747’s or the occassional 707.
An MK Airlines 747 at London Manston.
A typical Day at Manston.
I hope this report gave all of you a good insight to London Manston, and that it may have changed your views a little?
Hope you enjoy the read, a bit of a long one I know, sorry for that.
Cheers.
By: Saab 2000 - 27th January 2003 at 19:13
RE: Report on London Manston.
Well I still think the only way anything will happen in terms of expansion at Manston is if road and rail access is improved. They need better infrastructure if they are to become London Manston or Kent International, for example, motorway and high-speed rail track into the airport. The new development near Ashford for Eurostar is a good idea, maybe connecting that on to Manston or something could work.
By: GFox - 26th January 2003 at 19:30
RE: Report on London Manston.
A good report, a bit of a long one, but good nun the less! Llol 😛 Looks as if Manston is to one day be big! Good luck, its gonna take some time.
By: A330Crazy - 25th January 2003 at 19:21
RE: Report on London Manston.
You are most welcome fokker. Hope the long read didn’t bore you to death! 🙂 lol
By: Fokker - 25th January 2003 at 09:26
RE: Report on London Manston.
Thanks A330, for me as someone from the continent it is realy a nice look in what is going on in the UK!
By: A330Crazy - 25th January 2003 at 00:00
RE: Report on London Manston.
Glad this report was off some use to someone Carl. Thanx. 🙂
By: carl727 - 24th January 2003 at 17:57
RE: Report on London Manston.
Found your report on Manston very interesting. i used to live in Kent and have to say my visits to Manston at that time were not very fruitfull so I hope the future is brighter for the airport. I particularly enjoyed the Invicta International report and you confimed for me that they did fly B720s for a short while at least.
By: A330Crazy - 22nd January 2003 at 19:39
RE: Report on London Manston.
Just found this Article…
Introduction and summary
Labour believes Manston Airport has huge potential for contributing to the economic regeneration of East Kent. But some, especially those opposed to any development at the airport, have suggested that the Airport is being allowed to develop at the expense of the local environment.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Labour is very keen to see the Airport succeed and will not put insurmountable obstacles in the way of the airport developers. That is what the vast majority of people in East Kent want.
But Labour is equally determined to guarantee the quality of life for the airport’s neighbours and to ensure that appropriate environmental protection for local people is in place.
Both Labour MP Steve Ladyman and Thanet Council Leader Richard Nicholson live close to the ‘flight path’ in Ramsgate and so know exactly what the issues are.
Labour’s policy is to see the Airport develop and create local jobs –whilst making sure that appropriate controls on developments, including night flying, are in place.
That is why Thanet’s Labour Council has negotiated an agreement with the Airports owners – called a Section 106 agreement – to control the Airport development. This agreement allows local people a real say in the Airport’s future and will make sure financial concerns do not come before the environment. At the same time, the agreement gives the developers a fair chance to make a success of their business.
Manston Airport – Steve Ladyman’s view.
The following are issues often put to Steve Ladyman about the airport.
1. Why was the Section 106 agreement not discussed at Full Council before it was agreed if it is so important?
For many years now the Policy Committee of Thanet Council has been the supreme decision making body of the Council. All political parties are represented on the Policy Committee, the committee sits in public and debates issues thoroughly and matters are decided by a vote. All Councillors, including those who do not have a vote, are entitled to attend and speak at the Policy Committee under section 31.1 of the Local Government Act.
The Council, therefore, was entirely right to refer this matter to the Policy Committee (21st Sptember 2000) where it could be properly debated and decided upon. Any suggestion that this is undemocratic is based on a misunderstanding of the Council’s standing orders and procedures.
In the end, the Section 106 agreement was supported not only by the ruling Labour Group on the Council but also by the Conservative opposition.
2.Why was a new agreement needed when there was an existing Section 52 planning agreement controlling the Airport?
It has been suggested that the old Section 52 agreement, which is replaced by the new Section 106, prevented night flying. It did not.
It is very clear to anyone who read the Section 52 agreement that it only prevented the movement of civil jet aircraft through the ‘civil enclave’. The civil enclave is the concrete area around the passenger terminal. It does not include the runway.
In other words, all aircraft could land and take off at any time of the day and night. Propeller driven aircraft and military aircraft could also move anywhere within the airport at any time of the day or night. In fact, the Section 52 agreement only stopped a civil jet aircraft that has landed at night from moving off the airstrip onto a specific area of concrete. It could wait at the edge of this concrete until 7.30 a.m. without breaching the Section 52 agreement or it could transfer its passengers to a bus, or transfer cargo to a lorry, without breaching the agreement. It could also use a different part of the airport.
In other words, the old Section 52 agreement provided no environmental controls over the use of the airport. It provided no effective restriction on night flying.
Even if the Section 52 did provide a control on night flying it would be unenforceable because the agreement required it to be adjudicated by the RAF who are no longer responsible for air traffic control at the Airport.
This is why Thanet Council, which is absolutely determined to ensure proper controls on the Airport, wanted to negotiate a new agreement, the so-called Section 106.
Because the Section 52 agreement is ineffective and unenforceable it is Labour’s view that the Section 106 agreement which has been negotiated is a step forward. It does not provide us with all the protection that we would wish to see in an ideal world but it is the best that can be negotiated at the present time and it is a significant improvement over the Section 52.
The new Section 106 contains the following provisions:
a. It requires the developer to deposit a masterplan and an environmental impact assessment based on his plans. If he does not, or if these documents are found to be inadequate, then this becomes a material factor when the Council has to decide on future planning applications at the Airport. In other words, the Council will be able, under planning law, to turn down planning applications until the masterplan and environmental impact assessment are brought up to scratch.
b. The Section 106 requires noise monitoring to be carried out and an extensive system of noise monitoring stations to be built. For the first time we will have objective information about noise from the Airport.
c. In the first years of the agreement traffic will be monitored at the Airport as will noise and people living within a specific noise contour will be identified. The Airport developers must then put in place a plan to compensate these people and provide them with noise insulation for their home.
d. Further measures in the Section 106 agreement require the Airport to develop a ‘green’ transport strategy and combat pollution. There are also restrictions on engine testing.
e. The most controversial part of the Section 106 is in respect to night flying. It is true that it does not contain an outright ban on night flying, but there is already no outright ban on night flying. The Section 106 agreement, however, does require the developer should he wish to introduce night flying to give six months notice and to prepare a noise disruption policy and discuss it with the Council. At this time the developer has said he has no intention of introducing night flying.
3. If the Airport owner decides to introduce night flying, does the Council have a veto over his doing so?
No, but that has always been the position. Indeed, the owner could have done that before the Section 106 Agreement was made without even bothering to produce a noise disruption policy.
Now, if the owner were to ride roughshod over the wishes of the Council then the Council would have strong ammunition for refusing further planning approval on developments at the airport or would refuse to enter into a new Section 106 agreement at the end of the existing one. These actions would seriously disrupt the developer’s attempts to finance the airport and his investments and would be a strong deterrent to him ignoring the Councils wishes.
4. What other controls does Labour intend to make use of?
Labour is not relying only on the Section 106 agreement to control the development of the Airport:
a. The current terminal building only has capacity for about 1 million passengers per year. The developer will, therefore, very quickly have to return to the Council for planning approval on new terminal buildings or hangers and the Council will have the opportunity to introduce new planning conditions at that stage.
Until now the Council’s powers to do this have been limited because the developer inherited planning rights from previous airport owners and because the Council does not wish to put barriers in the way of investment in the airport. These restrictions will not apply to future developments as investment will already by underway and so the Council will be more free to act when presented with planning applications.
A restriction on using terminal buildings or hangers for passengers or cargo arriving after a particular time of night unless there is an agreed noise disruption policy would also be something Labour would want to see when future planning applications are submitted.
b. A European Union directive becomes effective from April 2002 and bans
the use of Chapter 2 aircraft anywhere in Europe. After April 2002 only the more modern and quieter aircraft, known as Chapter 3 aircraft, will be able to fly at Manston or anywhere else in the European Union. This will significantly reduce noise at the airport.
c. The Labour government is currently consulting on the subject of new legislation to give local authorities powers to control the environmental impact of airports. This is a new law that Labour has announced it will introduce as soon as parliamentary time allows and which will ensure that airport developers must listen to local councils and local people in respect to environmental matters and noise. Should airport operators introduce traffic of an intensity or at a time to disturb local people then the local authority will have the power to control it.
This is a new law that Dr.Ladyman has been actively lobbying Ministers and fellow MPs to introduce and the consultation on the detail was published in July 2000. It will give local authorities the power to enforce noise agreements and will strengthen the Council’s hand very considerably when the Section 106 agreement has to be renewed in three years time.
d. The Section 106 requires aeroplanes to take off away from Ramsgate whenever possible, to keep clear of Sandwich and to use a route that avoids populated areas when taking off to the west. When waiting to land, planes must be above 1,500 ft. and when landing over Ramsgate must manoeuvre over the sea. These are all new controls.
e. The Section 106 sets out substantial fines when the Airport operator breaks the agreement.
f. The Section 106 agreement must be renegotiated in three years time or, by consent of both sides, before then. If night flying has been introduced against local wishes then the Council could insist on new controls being introduced or could use its powers under the new law when the Section 106 is renewed.
5. How many jobs could the Airport create and how many aircraft movements will there be?
The rule of thumb for estimating job creation at airports is 1,000 jobs per million passengers carried, with additional jobs being created for freight shipments. This rule of thumb is more or less invariable and can be assessed from job creation at regional airports all around the UK. A good example is Luton airport, which carried 5 million passengers per year plus cargo, and employs 8,000 people directly at the airport.
It has been suggested that Manston Airport might somehow generate aeroplane movement and no jobs. This is not possible. Either there will be no aircraft movements and, therefore, no jobs or there will be aircraft movements and jobs will be created in proportion. The two go together.
Steve Ladyman has never based his own estimates on 1,000 jobs per million passengers but has preferred to be more conservative. Nevertheless, the opportunity for Manston airport to generate a significant amount of local employment is undeniable.
Estimates of aircraft movements are a matter of dispute.
Wiggins, the Airport owners, have suggested 20 million passengers per year in 10-20 years but, frankly, this is nonsense. A more reasonable estimate, based on extensive discussions with airline operators both locally and nationally and with other airport operators and air traffic planners will be around 2 to 3 million passengers with some additional freight traffic in 5-10 years.
Based on these figures, Manston Airport should certainly generate 2,000 to 3,000 local jobs from about 30 to 40 aeroplane movements per day. Many of these aeroplane movements will, however, be light aircraft that create little local disturbance.
7. What impact will the Airport have on property prices?
Experience from elsewhere in the UK shows property prices will rise, not fall if the airport is successful. In addition, we should recognise that Manston Airport has existed since the First World War and plans for the civil enclave and for development of a civilian business were made as long ago as 1988. These plans were also set out in the ‘local plan’, which was subjected to a public enquiry.
8. Will aircraft noise disrupt schools?
Noise of this type should diminish when more modern aeroplanes are in use but Labour will be pressing to ensure that noise insulation for schools as well as for homes is provided when the noise insulation proposals are brought forward.
Conclusions:
Thanet’s Labour Council and Steve Ladyman are determined to see proper environmental controls on the airport and always have been. They are also very keen to see the Airport develop and deliver real benefits for East Kent.
It is regrettable that some people have attempted to politicise these issues. Development of the airport not only has the support of the Labour controlled District Council but also the Conservative controlled County Council. In addition, the majority of Conservative and Independent Councillors on the District Council have always supported the Council’s actions in recent years. At the Policy meeting to discuss the new Section 106 (September 21st) the Conservatives spoke in favour of the Section 106 and voted for it with Labour councillors.
It is very easy for some election candidates to make bland statements like ‘we would ban night flying’ if they are not in a position to take action on their statement. The truth is these people have no idea how they would implement such a ban since the Council can only act within the law and is already doing everything it can to impose restrictions.
The Section 106 agreement has been put out to public consultation and amended in the light of that consultation. It has also been presented to the Manston Airport Consultative Committee and debated by the Council.
The Council has done everything in its power to ensure that Manston Airport not only is successful commercially but also successful from an environmental perspective. The Council has also worked very hard to ensure that all negotiations are carried out in public and that everybody’s views are taken into account.
Clearly there are some people who do not wish to see any airport development at all. These people are a very small minority of the population of Thanet and East Kent, the majority of whom want to see a successful airport developed.
The Council must balance this democratically expressed wish for a successful Airport with the environmental concerns of the Airport’s neighbours. They have done the best job that they could under the powers they have available but they must not stop these efforts with the Section 106 agreement. They must be clear about their future intentions and continue to use their additional powers to introduce further controls.
The end result must be a successful airport, contributing jobs and business for the local economy, but operated within limits that guarantee the quality of life of local people. That is Labour’s policy.
By: Saab 2000 - 22nd January 2003 at 18:37
RE: Report on London Manston.
Well it is a good little article, but it still doesn’t really provide information for me, which changes my views on the airport. Really I think the plans are too optimistic reinforced by the poor passenger numbers out of the airport. In the future it will be cargo for Manston in my opinion, with cruise charters and other smaller services…Whether or not this includes Mama Air.
By: MapleLeaf_330 - 22nd January 2003 at 17:53
RE: Report on London Manston.
Also, Airliners, or Airways, has an article on Manston at the moment.
By: T5 - 22nd January 2003 at 16:19
RE: Report on London Manston.
Airliner World done the Manston article.
By: Ren Frew - 22nd January 2003 at 16:08
RE: Report on London Manston.
I’m sure AW World or maybe Aircraft Illustated did a lenghty feature on Manston about 6 months ago ? Sounds like it could be one to watch. The management reminded of the Prestwick management that steered it towards it’s current revival, full of enthusiasm and bright ideas for future development. Here’s to them !
By: EGNM - 22nd January 2003 at 15:37
RE: Report on London Manston.
i dont mean to sound demeaning but tha last pic is a bit diceaving – the all white B747 is down there at the Air Atlanta maintenance base – there can be several 747s from them there at once, as well as the MK Airlines Cargo B747s and DC-8s, but many a/c there are basically been scrapped!
but for the spotters the odd AN-124 or IL76 and foreign DC-8 could be appealing!
By: A330Crazy - 22nd January 2003 at 12:57
RE: Report on London Manston.
Yes It does mainly deal with the cargo side of things at the moment, but on occassion you do get the odd civilian flight.
A lot of civilian aircraft are seen at Manston, but this is owed to the fact that Manston is a place of tempory storage and a pplace where aircraft recieve new paint jobs.
By: T5 - 22nd January 2003 at 00:59
RE: Report on London Manston.
Interesting information Andrew, a good read.
So it mainly deals with cargo flights? Perhaps if Mama Air in a few months time is a success, more airlines will be attracted to the airport. Airlines such as easyJet, taking over Go have enough aircraft and their profits mean they can afford to take such a risk.
Sign In
January 21, 2003 at 11:54 pm