The sale of the Manston airport site has been completed

Manston airport site

The sale of the Manston airport site to the firm aiming to bring cargo aviation and associated businesses to the site has been completed this evening (July 9).

Contracts were exchanged between RiverOak Strategic Partners (RSP) and former landowners Stone Hill Park last Wednesday but could not be completed until permission was given by the Secretary of State.

This was needed due to  a special development order designating the Manston airport site for use as a lorry park to cope with possible post-Brexit jams at the Port of Dover which is contracted to run until December 31, 2020.

Permission was received today.

Completion of the transaction, which means RSP subsidiary RiverOak MSE owns more than 95% of the site wanted for the airport plans, took place at 7.30pm.

SHP had owned 742 acres of the site which totals around 770 acres with plots belonging to other interested parties. RSP paid the firm £16.5million for the site. SHP had previously submitted a planning application to create up to 3,700 homes, business and leisure and associated infrastructure.

A Planning Inspectorate panel, led by Kelvin McDonald, has been examining the Development Consent Order bid being made by RiverOak Strategic Partners (RSP) to  acquire the site and create the cargo hub.

That examination, which opened in January, concluded today.

The DCO is still needed for the cargo hub project with a decision from the Secretary of State expected by January 2020. However, the compulsory purchase part of the application for the SHP owned land – equating to 98% of the site – is now defunct, although other landowners will still need to be compensated.

Issues surrounding national need, night flights and noise and blight compensation still need to be considered under the DCO process.

The land sale deal means SHP will withdraw its objection to the DCO. It will also withdraw its two outstanding planning applications for housing and mixed use on Manston and will no longer participate in the Local Plan Enquiry.

Tony Freudmann, of RSP, said: “We completed our transaction at 7.30pm. It is a great feeling.”

157 Comments

  1. So all they have to do now is
    1. Deal with the MOD (not going well)
    2. Deal with the CAA
    3. Get KCC onside
    4. Get acceptance of the DCO ( I wonder who will be SoS)
    5. wait until Brock no longer needs a lorry park
    6. Pay the interest on the Belizean loans
    7. Convince complete strangers the airport is viable so they lend them money
    Not much then
    7. Build a Cargo Hub

    • Convince carriers, currently embedded in East Midlands, Stansted and so on with their well established logistics infrastructures to move to Manston, stuck on the bottom right hand corner of Britain, with very poor road and no rail freight connections to the rest of the country, to move here and pay higher landing fees.

    • and handle the united nations upgrade of toxic threat tlo health from residual firefighting foam contamination PFOA . UN May 2019. The stuff Southern Waster never tested for when abstracting Thanet water supply from manston aquifer,

    • And 3 years to do it, get used to it and you made up non facts, time to shut up and put up Manston is coming back as an Airport, Pleanty of local estate agents to help you on your way.

      • Oh do STFU you nauseating Gammon. You will be 6 ft under by the time the first plane lands. I doubt your dreams of cheap flights to Torremolinos will ever come to fruition and you wouldn’t be welcome there anyway. Now be a good boy and take you Shih -Tzu out for a walk before it craps on your copy of The Daily Express. FYI the war ended 74 yrs ago.

      • In reply to anti airport protesters, etc post above:
        Hear hear!!!!!!!! Stop being selfish you anti-airport people. Get over it, whingers. It’s going to be an airport, offering jobs and making Thanet more wealthy at last! The airport will be the biggest employer in the area soon.

    • God help us. And attract some cargo carriers. I can’t see East Midlands and Stansted standing idly by while they do that. No doubt they will undercut RSP before they even get off the ground

    • Excellent news, planet thanet back on the map. No more sprawling little red boxes to look forward to. About time there was industry and jobs in the area. Bring it on.

      • Clean small industries on the port would be much better than an airport. There are Loop bus stops at the Harbour.

        • According to the still extant (existing and current) TDC Local Plan, it is still a protected airport, for Aviation Use only. Now RSP own the airport, the new, draft Local Plan will have to acknowledge that too. The Examination of the dLP is ongoing.

  2. It’s only a shame the significant majority Thanet population are unable to get their concerns so widely publicised too.

    It would be welcome to see an entire article devoted to concerns. Thousands have them, as do most statutory interested parties.

    I doubt Tony had such a good feeling when he read the MOD most recent objection.

    Can we please have an anti airport article. That is the majority view after all. Where is our voice?

      • I think Emmerline meant Tony Freudmann, the struck off solicitor and MD of a whole series of failed airport ventures.

    • Emmeline, where do you get that fanciful idea from?. (The majority are anti airport)
      The antis are the most vocal, that is about all, and thinking of themselves. I think of the jobs it will create and it’s knock-on effect on the local economy.
      Please get real.

        • I think you’re right.
          It’ll be called “Manston Park”, and the new railway station will be called “Manston Parkway”, and will be patronized by all the London commuters living at Manston Park.

    • This is a breaking news story, published 30 minutes after the contracts were signed. It is untrue to say anti airport views are not published, they are. Views on the contract exchange were published in full, not cut to a sentence like they were in other outlets. I have done articles on night flights, published about noise compensation, questioned where the funders are. If you are asking for balance you have been given it, perhaps some balance in the comments would be justified too.

      • I’m not suggesting anti comments are not published, apologies if that is what I inferred. What I’m saying is they are always part of a story about ‘progress’ by the applicant. My request is for a purely anti article. An interview with No Night Flights, Nethercourt Action Group or Ramsgate Town Council or KCC? If you are interviewing RSP tomorrow why not interview one of the many key opponents too? There are plenty of them.

        • I was arranging to speak to NNF yesterday precisely because I have an interview with RSP. Because of balancing views. Some people may find that balance annoying but it is necessary for fair journalism.

          • So will there be an interview with NNF, Nether Court Action Group, RTC or KCC? Of all these groups surely the huge membership of Nether Court Action Group is the key voice of Ramsgate. A community within throwing distance of the runway, who remember all too easily the horror of planes landing. The IOTN should do a piece on NAG at very least and find out what they have to say. Our own residents are being totally ignored whilst the dominant news theme appears to celebrate a bunch of failed airport operators aiming to land a cargo plane over our community every ten minutes. Why promote this clear potential for suffering and the sure demise of our town? I would urge you Kathy to contact Nethercourt Action, NNF, RTC or KCC or for maximum neutrality, all 4 of them.

          • I did say I had already contacted NNF (and the person is a Nethercourt councillor). The article does not ‘celebrate’ it simply conveys what the breaking news is.

      • As far as balanced comments go, I would dearly love to see some (any) logical argument based on fact to support the idea of a viable airport at Manston.
        Perhaps the reason that such postings don’t appear is because there aren’t any?

      • Well done Kathy. Reporting the facts and not a load of rhetoric where others make up information and report it as fact.

  3. So a British company has sold out to an overseas one that will end up building houses on it and some people think we should be celebrating. Time to do some real journalism and look into the effects of living near an airport and under a flight path. Poorer exam results, increased breathing difficulties, increased stroke risk and threat of early death. How about you research and print that article?

    This is a scandal that anyone who has actively participated in should be thoroughly ashamed.

    • The contract completed at 7.30. I published at 8pm. Because it is breaking news, that’s what this article is, a breaking news one.

      • I would just point out that it was “Stone Hill Park” that was sold, not “Manston Airport “. That closed a number of years ago.

        • I wonder how long before RSP put in a planning application for houses on the northern grass. At least this time Fraudman will have had the decency to wait until he owns it before approaching TDC.

      • I was just wondering how the sale completed after the banks shut. How would the money have been transferred.

        • The sale was dependent on agreement from the Secretary if State for Transport (SoST to his friends) because of the continuing need for Operation Brock.

        • That is easy MIO placed the money into BDM’s escrow account and then paid it over on completion. Either that or a large van arrived with suitcases after a flight from Belize

  4. I wish the new owners all the luck in the world ,people living near should remember the airport was there long before they were.

    • Why should people remember that? It wasn’t a commercial airport till after the end of WW2. It was an airfield.

      People haven’t forgotten that during the war, Manston was important, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be used for non-aviation purposes now.

      • Civilian enclave was started in 1959 when the USAF left because residents complained about the noise.

        Plenty of folk in Thanet old enough lol
        The grasp of history is wonderful

      • Mr Freudmann never experienced 8-10 flights an hour, because every one of the dozen or more airports he was involved with has failed.

  5. Remember that jewel in Thanet’s Crown “our airport” is now owned by an entity, HLX Nominees, registered in Tortola and funded by a different entity MIO in Belize.
    Rather than gain control your support has enabled 742 acres of Thanet land to be transferred offshore
    Way to go

  6. Are these people insane? It didnt work last time, it won’t this time. Fools throwing money down the drain. As for employment, everywhere we see machines taking the jobs of people. It won’t be any different here.

    • the reaso it never worked with planestation and eu is because they offered to many routes to places that most people didnt want to go to I was a travel agent in LOndon most people didnt know KIA even existed as it was never prmoted that well. KLm made or were on rote to making it a success and will do if they return we just need a carrier that knows their buisness. As for jobs ones in engineering are brilliant what this are aneeds is jobs and training that are unique to down here. GIve it a vhance this time it will be the success and making of Thanet

      • The guy in charge when it wasn’t being promoted by a bloke who didn’t know his business was Tony Freudmann, the struck-off solicitor who now heads up RSP.
        In the year the airport closed, unemployment was running at 10%. Now it’s 5%. Obviously no airport has a good effect on employment.

      • Funny how a “travel agent” thinks success is just 43% seat occupancy over a whole year.
        Freudmann failed because he ran up debts some at 28% interest rates.
        Failed to advertise LOL

  7. It’s a win-win situation for RSP, that’s for sure. In the unlikely event the DCO is granted they will be free to build their fantasy airport. If the DCO is rejected they will be free to redevelop the site. The airport was always a long shot so my money’s on redevelopment.

  8. Houses, houses, houses. Bring them on. Sorry peeps but planes at Manston are a thing of the past. TF and co are probably paying off Sos to ensure no DCO. They don’t need it now and they don’t need SMAa

  9. The likelihood of a DCO is rather thin.
    For example:
    RSP’s case in respect of “Need” is built on the work of Dr Sally Dixon of Azimuth Associates. This work in turn is largely based on previous work by Louise Congdon, Managing Partner, York Aviation .
    On several occasions Ms Congdon has shown Dr D’s work to be fundamentally flawed: at a KCC meeting where LC tore Dr D to shreds, in written reports presented to PINS, in presentations at Issue Specific Hearings, and most recently, an unsolicited submission to PINS (post SHP selling out) affirming LG’s confidence in her previous work.
    Other than Dr D/Azimuth, there is no person or organisation saying that aviation at Manston would be anything but failure.

  10. SHP has sold out on Thanet residents who supported them against that noisy, polluting disaster that could become a reality in the next few years if the SOS decides it is of significant national interest.
    Thank you very much.

  11. Did money change hands or is this an agreement in priciple to sell should the DCO be granted or, didn’t you ask your source that question?

  12. I grew up with the airport next door and didn’t suffer any ill effects. I hope my grandchildren will be able to do the same. Good luck to RSP on the next stage of restoring the airport and attracting the ever increasing cargo demand.

    • I hope your grandchildren will grow up without I’ll effects from living near an airport. Unfortunately, the evidence is overwhelming that noise and pollution from airports is rather bad.
      Given the choice would you rather have your grandchildren live next to an airport, or well away from it?

  13. Jay Perry raises a very good question. Jentex still seems to be operating despite RSP claiming to won their site. I guess the acid test will be to see who stops you going onto the airfield tomorrow? Will it be security staff working for SHP or will you be free to walk onto the site because RSP haven’t had time to arrange anything?

  14. Emmiline, your comment referring to doing an article is totally justified. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to have an article talking about the noise disturbance for Ramsgate, the statistics from the World Health Organisation about children’s learning near airports, the problems the cargo hub would have on the Heritage Zone status we have been recently awarded. The fact that Ramsgate Town Council is against the idea, for the damage it wold do to our burgeoning tourism and the Active Ramsgate work that RTC has been working on to promote the area for over two years. Let’s look at Ramsgate more and be honest with the negative effects cargo hubs have near residential areas, let alone one that relies on its heritage, sandy beaches and Georgian architecture. Let’s sing our praises as a place people want to come to and talk about how that would be effected. I look forward to reading it.

      • No. We’re talking about a piece reflecting on Ramsgate. That was the gist of my comment. The negative effects it will have on an area that is outstanding in its heritage and beauty. RTC was a small part of that as an example

    • Hear hear. The threat to Ramsgate is very real and for some reason, the concerned majority simply cannot be heard in our own right on our own terms. I would like a Q and A IOTN interview with the Chair of Nethercourt Action Group. Why does every article have to have neutrality? It isn’t the BBC or Switzerland. It also doesn’t feel neutral or balanced, it feels supportive I’m afraid. Sorry.

        • I’m sorry because you are getting repeated messages that the coverage is pro and the concerned are an afterthought. I’m sorry I read instant progress stories and much less coverage in respect of the significant population. I would reiterate my suggestion for an interview with the Chair of Nethercourt Action Group, a collective of some 200+ people.

          Has a request been made for an interview with them? Or Ramsgate Town Council?

          • Ramsgate Town Council wrote a piece, I think you commented on it. I have gone to NNF. I didn’t say repeated messages or that anyone is an afterthought, not my words at all

  15. Suck it up buttercups, we won. I request some extra loud aircraft over your gaffs immediately upon opening. Enjoy!

    • What did you win?
      The Fat lady has yet to sing, didn’t the SoS tell you Buttercup
      BTW didn’t Bruce say that abuse was purely an anti airport issue?

    • Nice to see an airport supporter commiserating politely with the poor deluded anti-airport Luddites as opposed to insulting them.

  16. What a shame for all those negative nimby’s. The Airport should never have been closed and asset stripped in the first place. That was a disgrace. This will bring jobs to an area that needs them and it’s fantastic news – simple as that

    • I’m afraid at best there will be around 150 jobs with 60 additional highly skilled jobs ATC, firefighters, operation personnel engineers.The reality is, most of what is being proposed here is a highly automated, computer controlled freight and storage facility with a few ramp and handling personal required for ground ops and re-fuelling.

      I know a bit about this industry, trust me, what is being promised and the reality is something quiet different.

  17. Kathy Baileys. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the way you report the news it’s always fair and balanced.
    The Anti Manston Airport mob are the real neighbours from hell not the Airport I would rather have an Airport next to me than live next to one of the antis. Who will find fault in everyone and everything except themselves. They are a very sad lot. On the plus side those of us who are delighted that those wide boys who hid behind ‘Robo Cop’ ha ha ha,
    Talk about laugh Robo cop my rear end have now gone along with Gloag. Good riddance to them.

    • How would Ann, above, know her neighbours were “antis”? The pros and cons of a local airport rarely crop up in conversation. Possibly because RSP unlike Vattenfall has not had information about their alleged plans delivered to every address (as far as I know) in Ramsgate.

  18. “Talk about laugh Robo cop my rear end”?? And the airport supporters say living under the flight path did them no harm?

    I often read IOTN and feel there is a bias towards supporting the airport. Interestingly comments were removed from another article which questioned IOTN biais towards the airport and the misleading SMAa ad. IOTN claimed a thread was removed by Akismet, Akismet say that’s not how it works – only an individual comment is removed not a thread.

    Will be interesting to see if IOTN take up the challenge of writing an article based purely on the effects a 24/7 cargo hub will have on Ramsgate and it’s residents, without trying to sneak in support for the cargo hub.

    • I said nothing about Akismet, I said a comment was blocked not a thread removed. I then went to moderation and released it. The bias claim is rubbish, sorry, ‘sneaking in support’ is also rubbish. I have written about the course of events, always included both sides and don’t include my own view, you should really stop assuming that you know what my view is because you clearly don’t. For the avoidance of doubt this is a business, mine, paid for by me, it gives a service to the public but like most businesses I am free to remove anyone who only ever uses the site to make derogatory comments.

  19. if You have ever lived in a suburb of London you will not want housing on the airport site. I moved to the Medway Towns in 1974 and watched that area grow into a London over spill area and of course the London boroughs that buy up any houses that are built down here, like those at Westwood, will move the people out of London that they don’t want living there.

  20. A thread was removed not just one comment. The comments on that thread criticised the SMAa ad. If not removed by Akismet which is what your site says it uses to reduce spam then the comments were removed manually them reinstated when someone asked why they’d been deleted.

    Irrespective of who owns IOTN I would hope that the reporting would be unbiased. Many people I speak to gave the impression that IOTN is pro airport. It might therefore be worth listening to your readers who feel this way rather than threatening to remove them.

    Someone suggested an article which looks at the potential effects of a cargo hub over Ramsgate. Will you be researching this?

    • I use many plug ins, not just Akismet. There are quite a few comments about the advert, they haven’t been removed. I rarely remove anything or anyone, even when I find them intensely annoying. The reporting is unbiased, the complaints appear to be against having balance. An article written giving only one view is biased yet that appears to be what you are asking for. I listen to readers, I find that the majority of them aren’t massively interested in the Manston site either way.

  21. So you’re saying that writing an article on the effects a cargo hub would have on Ramsgate would be biased? Interesting way to look at it.

    You may listen to readers but anyone suggesting they find IOTN biased is dismissed. Readers who are letting you know they want to see an article on how a cargo hub would affect Ramsgate are interested. Brushing them off with a comment that “the majority of them aren’t massively interested either way” is a cop out. Brush off enough of your readers this way and no doubt you’ll add to those who are disinterested.

    And you still haven’t answered the question.

    • Mostly you seem to be asking for an article about the site that doesn’t include RSP or any pro views, so that would be a one sided article. I have no problem looking at the effects of cargo hubs. I’m afraid it is true, most readers just do not worry about what will happen at the Manston site, it isn’t a cop out, it is a fact. There are groups that are pro and groups that are anti but these are not a majority of people either way. after five years disinterest has set in for a lot of residents.

      • I disagree. The local elections demonstrate a majority anti Councillor portfolio for TDC and RTC. The only legitimate poll ever run demonstrated over 80% objections to night flights. What we ‘anti’ voices object to is the endless stream of ‘progress’ news articles. Why not run an article on the fundraising needed by local residents to pay for CAA noise contours because RSP were failing to demonstrate accurate noise estimations or fair compensation? There are many many human angles to this absurd drama, shared by thousands and thousands of residents. Only a vocal minority support cargo plane spotting, just a shame this minority includes our airline owning MP.

        Nobody has proved viability or national need.

        Ramsgate is under threat and this threat should be publicised far and wide.

  22. Well I for one think the SMAa advert stating no night flights is a blatent lie and so would any reasonable person who has read RSPs noise mitigation plan. My comments were removed before

    • It is a lie. RSP is attempting the same blight as before when a third of arrivals were late. If they really mean no, then state in the draft DCO none. No late. No charter. No schedule. No emergency. But they won’t, will they.

      As too is 9,500 jobs for locals. RSP defines a local as anyone with a 90 minute commute. Hmmm, that would include most of South London, and a good part of Sussex and all of Kent.

      Hardly local.

      Outright misleading.

  23. Many residents do seem uninterested but they aren’t necessarily disinterested, in fact I’d say no Ramsgate resident can be disinterested, once they know what RSP’s proposal is.

    • The only reason a lot of people are disinterested is because RSP have gone out of their way not to inform people who are affected of their plans. Starting with the consultation when nobody on Nethercourt, one of the worst affected communities, were informed of the consultation period or the San Clu event.

  24. So those opposed to a Cargo Hub state and provide evidence that living under a flightpath is dangerous to health
    RSP state the benefits of a Cargo Hub outweigh the issues over noise and health issues (as they would)
    What RSP don’t say is that there are zero issues with noise and health.
    So in effect both sides of this discussion over Noise etc are in agreement that building a Cargo Hub will disadvantage £40K residents living under a Cargo Hub.
    So writing an article wouldn’t actually be biased one way or another Kathy

  25. Absolutely hypocrites all those who moan abut Manston Airport and the pollution are more than happy to drive to Gatwick or any airport to go on holiday and don’t give a fig about the residents in those areas. Self self self. To make matters worse for them Boris is all for Manston Airport. Ha ha ha.

    • This airport objector neither drives nor flies. He gives such a fig for local residents that he’s doing the best he can to see that their lives are not ruined by a 24×7 (yes, it will be – unlimited “late” arrivals) cargo hub.
      I do wonder, though, if it will ever happen. I was reading some stuff on the PINS site about business plans and viability. Apparently RSP will charge 4 times as much to handle flights ad Stansted or East Midlands. According to projections based on what they loosely call their “business plan”, it will be something like 16 years before investors see a return on their £250M outlay.
      On the other hand, were they to build houses, then investors would see excellent returns in just a couple of years.

    • RSP state clearly in the Environmental Statement that communities such as Ramsgate will suffer adverse effects. What part of that Ann did you not read? Would you like the direct quote or will you look it up for yourself?
      Clearly the words of one person sums up the pro lobby and RSP
      “Nick Toy you’re so right. Ramsgate is the sacrifice that councillors that support the airport are prepared to make for the greater good of Thanet. Someone always has to lose for the majority to prosper. Sad but a reality”
      This was in 2015 prophetic words indeed.

  26. RSP
    “Accordingly, it is the Applicant’s case that the benefits will inevitably and significantly outweigh the adverse impacts by a considerable margin. Objectors have complained that the project will never succeed and that it will blight the area with environmental impacts, but these arguments are mutually exclusive. If the project does not succeed, the adverse impacts of which objectors have complained (noise, air quality, traffic etc) will not materialise. The Applicant remains firmly of the view that the project will succeed. The amount of time and money that it has invested in the project, which stood at some £15m before the acquisition of the Stone Hill Park land and now stands at over £30m is testament to its confidence in the viability and deliverability of the project.”
    Complete and utter weasel words. But then they are throwing Ramsgate under the bus

  27. Kathy Bailes, a big thanks you for all your fare and balanced news reporting, especially when it comes to the highly emotive Manston Airport matter.
    I respect that you have never taken sides and have always given a fair crack of the whip to those, for and against, the reopening of the Manston Airport site.
    Your reporting on all matters Thanet is exceptional, hence the awards your publication “theisleofthanetnew.com” has received since its inception, it is nice to have our local Thanet news reported accurately and not 50+ miles away.
    Keep up the good work, I may not agree everything you publish, but I do respect that you have to put everyone’s views across even if you disagree with them views, and I respect that.

  28. Everyone complaining about the noise of airplanes from manston have no basis for complaint unless they moved here before 1916 which is when the airport was build. Why move to an area near the airport if you can’t stand the noise did you expect the airport to be silent yes it was then taken over by a civilian firm in 1969 so I guess there would be an increase in flights but it’s an airport you chose to live by it.

    • What on Earth makes you think there’s going to be an airport at Manston? It makes absolutely no sense at all. Better to build a load of houses.

    • The was no airport in 1916 and it didn’t have an airfield until 1919 when it became RAF. Civilians didn’t use the airfield until 1959 when the USAF left.
      The least you could do Aj is research properly

      • Well the research I found stated that

        During the winter of 1915-1916, during the First World War, early aircraft began to use open farmland at Manston as a site for emergency landings.

        Admiralty Aerodrome at Manston was established.

        Not long after this the Handley Page Training School was set up to instruct pilots in the use of the new Handley Page bombers.

        By the close of 1916 there were two distinct units stationed at Manston the Operational War Flight Command and the Handley PageTraining School.

        Manston Airport then came into existence in 1916 as a Royal Naval station

        So according to this planes have landed at manston since 1915 and it became manston airport in 1916 as I said

        • Nope. What you said was “1916 which is when the airport was build [sic]”
          The airport was built many, many decades later. Up until then it was a military airfield.
          So what? What’s what happened 100 years ago got to do with nowadays?
          In order to get a DCO, RSP has to show need, amongst other things. This it has singularly failed to do.
          There won’t be an airport. One wonders what there might be instead?

          • And I was talking about all the people who are complaining about the noise if it does open as an airport again would you move to an area with loud noise going on then complain because it loud or would you stop and think oh may not be a good idea as it was here first and it states it became manston airport in 1916 soo sorry I said build I should have said became as the runway would already have been there but it still means there were airplanes flying so it would have been clear that there would be noise

        • you do understand the difference between airfield and airport. come back when you have done the basics. last time I looked the RAF didn’t do passengers lol

    • I don’t follow Aj’s logic. What people don’t want is the noise and pollution a non-stop sequence of planes flying above Ramsgate etc would cause. This is not a complaint- it is a criticism and a very strong one given how close Ramsgate is to the proposed cargo hub.

      The number of flights over central Ramsgate daily when I moved here was very low, but each was devastatingly loud. Despite the site not having moved a centimetre, RSP’s plans include over 80,000 flights a year. So there is no comparison with the former level of noise, which as I’ve just said was disturbingly high, and the level which would accompany RSPs proposed airport.

  29. Wow you have spent a whole day wasted on here arguing when you should be finding an Estate Agent, Manston Airport is coming back bigger and better with a massive financial backing, just need to look at the millions already spent. they have no money! they have no money! they have no money! they have no money! ask SHP if they have any money.Tick Tock the clock is running down.

    • They are gambling with peanuts in the grand scheme of the profits they could make…. from houses….. Their numbers for an airport simply don’t stack up !

      • Only money rsp have spent is borrowed money at God knows what interest rate. So it now owes 34 million pounds to offshore investment companies and have 7.5 million wirth or assets

    • People keep posing the question: where will the business come from?
      There is no shortage of dedicated air cargo capacity in the UK, and there won’t be for decades to come once H3 opens.
      Carriers currently using East Midlands etc are hardly likely to relocate to Manston. EM etc have well established logistics and infrastructure; Manston has neither.
      In order to generate any sort of return on its investment, RSP will charge 4 times what EM does, and even then it will be at least 16 years, if ever, before it turns a profit.
      It just doesn’t add up – unless you know better (And that doesn’t include SMAa’s nonsense).
      On the other hand, house building would reap a quick and large return.

  30. Why do the airport fans make up so much rubbish !!

    “It was great to hear that not only have Riveroak already negotited freight deals/operators, but also Ryanair are seriously interested in instigating passenger flights as well!! ”

    How can they have negotiated deals when they have no airport licence or likelihood of having one for many years ??

    • EgonSpengler you reckon you RSP would get £40 million plus in housing on Manston, majority of it would be social housing for DFL and London local authority housing, I guess the rest will be built from gold bars and Lego bricks. jog on the Estate Agents are waiting for your business, Tick! Tock! three years an counting.

      • I have to say that some of the comments on this topic, particularly those referencing ‘tick, tock’ and ‘go find an estate agent’ who fear the impact of these proposals are pure vile and demeaning of those who post in such a discourteous manner.

        Let me ask those who support the reintroduction of Manston as a 24/7 cargo hub what they personally lose if it doesn’t happen?……compared to those who fear a 24/7 cargo hub if it does happen given concerns raised about noise, sleep deprivation, pollution, impact on children’s education, impact on property prices, loss of tourism etc?

        Before anyone celebrates the ‘rebirth’ of Manston as a 24/7 Cargo hub perhaps consider your fellow townspeople point of view, that such plans are still subject to recommendation and acceptance of the DCO by the Secretary of State for transport and the applicant by their own admission raising the necessary funding post approval….and also perhaps consider the major objections to the proposals raised by the Ministry of Defence, never mind any other authority or thousands of local residents, which alone will likely sink this application….. Such an outcome appears to be the will of the vast majority in Ramsgate per the most recent council election results at both a town and district level….

        • Before anyone celebrates the ‘rebirth’ of Manston as a 24/7 Cargo hub.. you patronise us more with your spurious lies, Tick Tock the clock is ticking down, how many more spurious lies can you make up, waste of your time as we, the people of Thanet saw through you many a moon ago, the airport is coming.

          • Sorry which spurious lies would those be ‘tick, tock’?! I appreciate the facts about residents’ concerns, that RSP want to open a cargo hub with more than 3,000 night flights per year, the very serious objection raised by the Ministry of Defence and the Labour Party surge in the recent elections on the back of their anti-aviation stance at Manston grate with you…..but please point out any of my spurious lies?

      • Nothing wrong with social housing, we need much more of it. By the way, TDC’s new housing in King Street and Sussex Street seems to be getting going. W.W. Martin’s are the builders.

        • “On behalf of the majority who live in Ramsgate ” that RSP want to open a cargo hub with more than 3,000 night flights per year… ha ha ha more lies lies and more lies even when your heard it from the horses mouths you still maintain a lie over night flights.
          On behalf of the majority who live in Ramsgate (more like NIMBY with fingers in ears) these lies we see through we have seen and heard that these are lies. tick tock show is coming to an end. 3 more years and counting.

          • ‘Tick, Tock’- you clearly haven’t read the RSP DCO application then re night flights and impact on Ramsgate?! Before you place too much faith in RSP, maybe await the outcome of the DCO decision (it really isn’t going well!) which is completely separate to the recent acquisition. It’s a bit like you buying a former quiet sleepy country pub that closed due to lack of custom…..
            And then trying to reopen it as a massive nightclub- you can’t assume you’ll get planning permission just because you claim it has been serving booze for 100 years before it closed 5 years prior! But maybe you would!

            and if you really hate the idea of all the houses, with no infrastructure, that RSP are going to build on their newly acquired land once the DCO is rejected then maybe you can avail yourself of the services of the estate agencies that you are so keen to promote! Tick, tock’!!!

      • Here’s a thought.
        Even if RSP gets its DCO, it is unlikely to have completed the necessary building work until 2022. There own data shows that usage of the airport won’t reach the key DCO level of >10,000 ATMs until year 6 (ie 2028) by which time Heathrow R3 will be up and running, completely removing any need for Manston at all.
        RSP would be better off building houses.

        • Tony take a lie down, the Airport is Scheduled to reopen in Spring 2022, there is work going on site even today and a lot more to come over the years, hence 3 years to go or stay and the clock is ticking. should you stay or go it is happening. Tick! Tock!

  31. God knows what the moaners would have done when we had two Airports one in Ramsgate and one at Manston.
    Ramsgate Airport was a civil airfield at Ramsgate, Kent, United Kingdom which opened in July 1935. It was briefly taken over by the Royal Air Force in the Second World War, becoming RAF Ramsgate. The airfield was then closed and obstructed to prevent its use. It reopened in 1953 and served until final closure in 1968. Wikipedia
    We also had at Manston the USAF. with the large transport and bombers flying over head.

    • Ha – comparing Ramsgate Airport 50 years ago’s little prop planes doing pleasure flights with fully laden 747s into the night, not that the latter will ever happen !

      • 50 years ago we had vulcan bombers and victor tankers doing circuit and bump for most of the night a few times a week, hardly little prop planes surely!!!

      • No doubt any of the moaners who have the money to do so will move away. Think about what that will mean; less affluent people in Thanet and a higher level of deprivation. People unloading planes will be on minimum wage and unable to afford to buy a house which will not reduce in value because of the rental opportunities.

  32. Let’s be clear about this when Ann Gloag took over Manston Airport she paid a £1 plus the debts 4.4 millions.
    She then transferred debts from Preswick Airport in Scotland which she also owned to Manston to clear preswick of debts so it could be sold debt free. She then closed Manston Airport saying it was heavily in debt. It was her playing with the bottom line that made manston look much more in debt than was the true case. KLM wanted to do more from Manston but she did not want a successful Airport she wanted one to asset strip and close down as she had done so many times before with other businesses.

    • Let’s be clear about this. When Manston closed it was losing £10,000 a day and had lost £100,000,000.00 over its lifetime.
      Manston as an airport has many failings. One of the biggest is its location. Stuck in the bottom right hand corner of the UK, surrounded on three sides by fish.
      And no, it doesn’t have excellent transport connections with London. There is no rail connection, especially no rail freight, and to get goods from Manston to the big distribution centres you have to drive A299, M2, M25, M11, A14. Or you could just leave your stuff on a plane flying direct to East Midlands.

    • Ann one slight problem with that argument is anne Gloag never owned prestwick.

      KLM were running at under 50% loading, the closure was a god send for them, it allowed them to walk away without looking the bad guys

    • That is completely untrue and is not the way accounting or business works. As a unique entity, Manston airport lost money every single year. The man leading the DCO attempt has had 29 failed businesses behind him and zero successful ones.

      All he keeps talking about is poor infrastructure. Either he is too stupid to understand the very basic principles of supply and demand or he thinks that everyone else is.

  33. Sir rogeroak has written in handed of his fears for the health of his grandchildren living near Heathrow so he cares about them but not our children in the same situation

  34. What the MOD say:

    In conclusion MOD maintain our objection on the basis that insufficient information has been submitted to provide any positive indication that potential harm to safeguarded operational defence assets can be overcome or readily mitigated

    What concerned Affected residents say:
    In conclusion concerned residents maintain their objections on the basis that insufficient information has been submitted to provide any positive indication that potential harm to safeguard their health and wellbeing can be overcome or readily mitigated

    We now serve notice on RSP that action will also be taken to ensure that this land grab does not result in more than 4000 houses….. Or none at all if the greenfield sites are already committed. This will, in that case, be a very lush nature reserve.

  35. So many on here talk utter rubbish. The facts are the Manston Airport has never been easier to get to and from than it is today with dual carriageway all the way to the motorway net work. Fast train service and new Parkway Station planned. The Airport has the Sea on three sides of it so much more environmentally suited than inland Gatwick and Heathrow. Many of the plane operators and the support services of the big airports are struggling with the extra cost the volume of passengers to deal with and the sheer amount of traffic for passengers / staff / Goods getting to and from the airport and let’s not forget Air traffic control which failed at Gatwick yesterday afternoon and caused mayhem. Most airlines are in debt because of the running cost and what they have to pay the Airport owners to operate, WOW AIR ceased trading in March. Manston was NOT losing £10,000 per day absolutely rubbish, that figure was all part of the lies banded about by Gloag crowd to try and justify the closing of the Airport. Good news will follow soon about other developments relating to the Airport watch this space.

    • Ann, I give you this: https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent-business/county-news/why-manston-never-took-off-33923/
      The Parkway station, if it ever happens, will be no nearer to Manston than Minster and Ramsgate currently are. There would still need to be a shuttle bus.
      And that would be useless, because the plan is for a cargo airport.
      Their is no rail siding on the Manston site. No trailhead.
      East Midlands is a freight hub because it is a hub! It’s in the middle of Britain. Freight flown into EM can, in a few hours, be on trucks or trains and distributed to the four corners of the UK. In contrast, freight flown into Manston would, after a few hours, have reached London. To get anywhere else, it would have to be driven past Gatwick Heathrow, Stansted, East Midands … what’s the point?
      As for cost, according to York Aviation’s analysis of RSP’s data, Manston would have to charge 4 times as much as EM, and even at then, it would take RSP something like 16 years to get any sort of return on their multi-million pound investment.
      RSP has indicated that ATC at Manston could be carried out remotely, possibly from Gatwick.
      “Good news will follow soon about other developments relating to the Airport watch this space.” Indeed. I expect to see an application for PP for housing in due course.

      • If there is all this pent up demand why is it taking until year six of operations to meet the cargo ATMs required for a DCO? Not as if there was a major bottleneck when Manston closed. Apart from a few plane spotters and people relieved the noise and pollution had stopped did anyone really notice ?

  36. Ann, you are as determined to inflict damage on Ramsgate (the sacrifice deemed necessary and good by Roger Gale and presumably our own MP) as many of us are to prevent it. Why?”

    Good news” would be that the DCO is refused and that TDC start to explore less dirty and harmful ways of bringing industry to Thanet.

  37. So we have a company that wants to run a cargo hub who want to get another company to run it “as they have no experience” ( and before you say it I know Tony Fraudman was CEO there) and a third company will own it. Doesn’t sound iffy at all. What can possibly go wrong ??!

  38. EgonSpengler funny how RSP never bought up any of these commitments from airlines during the examination period and now that it is closed they all appear out of nowhere. RSP could not name one carrier or airline that had made any commitment at all.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.