Port of London Authority talks over Ramsgate – Thames freight route proposal for Manston airport

Ramsgate Port

The Port of London Authority (PLA) has confirmed early talks are underway with RiverOak Strategic Partners over potentially moving freight landed at Manston airport on a route from Ramsgate Port and up the River Thames.

The discussion has looked at transporting items such as perishable goods as waterborne freight rather than going to the capital via road.

The River Thames is the busiest inland waterway in the United Kingdom, carrying 60% of all goods lifted on the UK’s inland waterway network.

There are some  50 ‘safeguarded’ wharves within Greater London that are for cargo-handling uses.

RSP director Tony Freudmann said: “Freight would arrive at Manston, be trucked to the Port of Ramsgate and transferred by electric powered vessels. They will sail from the Port of Ramsgate, round the Thames and up to London. We have discovered there are up to 50 wharves in London available for this type of thing.

“The PLA say the Thames is currently primarily used for construction sites in London, such as Fulham Football Club which is having a new stand built, all arriving by water. It is also used for carrying waste materials down the Thames and out of London but they are keen to see it used for different kinds of freight, and for perishables the possibilities are quite significant.”

Mr Freudmann says the PLA made the initial approach, He says no discussions have yet taken place with port owner Thanet council and an approach will be made after assessing the feasibility of the proposals.

A PLA spokesman said:“The Port of London Authority (PLA) has begun initial discussions on possible ways the River Thames might be used in future to move certain types of freight and packages that have first landed at Manston by aircraft.

“The discussions are at a very early stage – scoping out the types of cargo that might be moved into London from Thanet in this way.  However the PLA always welcomes constructive approaches to make more use of the Thames for waterborne freight – not least as part of other successful initiatives to get lorries and vans off the busy roads and motorways of London and the southeast.”

Thanet council leader Rick Everitt said: “We don’t know whether or not the DCO will be granted and RSP will ever be able to operate Manston as an airport. It would seem premature to make public statements about the council’s likely response to a possible approach which is doubly contingent on factors outside RSP’s control.”


A decision on whether to grant a development consent order to create an air cargo hub at the Manston airport site is yet to be made.

The decision had been due on January 18 but a written statement to Parliament made by Nusrat Ghani, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport said the latest delay means the outcome is now due to be announced on May 18.

The first step of a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) process on flights paths and air space has been completed. The process, which takes 104 weeks, will be the subject of a public consultation in Ramsgate and St Nicholas-at-Wade in late Summer.

Heathrow ruling

The outcome may also be impacted after controversial plans for a third runway at Heathrow airport were deemed unlawful because climate commitments were not taken into account.

The Court of Appeal judgement follows a case launched by environmental campaigners. Judges said for the third runway to go ahead it would have to fit with UK climate policy.

The Climate Change Act 2008, as amended through the Climate Change Act 2008 (2050 Target Amendment) Order 2019, established a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions target in law by 2050.

It is not yet clear what impact the ruling may have on the Manston application although the Secretary of State requested further clarification on RSP’s assessment of the carbon emissions contribution from Manston airport representing 1.9% from the total UK aviation emissions for 2050 and how net-zero emissions could be achieved.

Part of the RSP response says: ” If consented and brought into operation, the Proposed Development would
comply with any national and international (e.g. CORSIA) requirements to reduce or offset emissions from aviation; but these should be carefully developed as part of a national strategy.

“In terms of individual commitment, since the end of the examination, the Applicant has committed the private sector contribution to the £1m tree planting project that enables it to go ahead (the first in England), the Forestry Commission’s Urban Tree Challenge Fund initiative.

“The Applicant would be prepared to accept a requirement that the operations at the airport other than aircraft emissions become ‘net zero’ within five years of the airport coming into operation, of which this initiative would form part.”

Richard Styles

Ramsgate Town Council clerk Richard Styles said the River Thames freight proposal raises questions such as timings, carbon balance and pressures on Ramsgate’s road network.

He said: “Logistics are all about point to point timings. Airfreight is supposed to be about quick, just in time delivery, of perishables and priority goods. If you are going to tranship at least 5 times on every consignment you are adding to delay and costs. The reason why road freight maintains its hegemony, is the avoidance of transhipping and the ability to go direct from producer/warehouse to hub or retailer.

“Every time you trans-ship there will be a carbon balance to consider. There is also a greater possibility of damage, pilferage, mistakes and added cost. One day a week the tunnel into the harbour will be closed. What happens then?

Ramsgate Port Photo John Horton

“The road network from Manston to Ramsgate port is sclerotic; worse still if the old Military Road route has to be taken.

“What it looks like is Ramsgate gets all the noise and nuisance of an airfreight business and then gets its roads clogged up with tractor units dropping off small consignments to a waiting vessel. Not much of a prospect is it?”

He questioned port destinations and whether it could be competitive with sites such as Heathrow.

In terms of the Heathrow ‘climate’ ruling he said it had ‘put the cat amongst the pigeons with high carbon proposals like Manston,’ adding: “Planting a few trees in Margate (in reference to the ITTWI), is not going to offset tons of carbon used to get airfreight consignments to Manston. Transport and infrastructure projects cannot blithely ‘green wash’ their proposals anymore.

“Aviation has a considerable problem in being carbon neutral, because it requires a lot of power and fuel to fly large numbers of passengers and freight over long distances.

“In my view Manston stands or falls on its business case and its ability to reduce its carbon footprint to zero by 2050. This is a tall order and proposals like this are not likely to go far. It’s dressing up in the emperor’s new clothes.”

Estimated timeline

RSP plans

If DCO approval is given in May RSP aim to start construction in 2021 and complete the first, and largest, phase of development by the first quarter of 2023.

Mr Freudmann said: “The timing of other phases will depend on demand and on the requirements of users.”

Development costs are expected to be in the region of £300-400 million. RSP says it has spent in excess of £34million, including £16.5million to purchase the main bulk of the site from former owners Stonehill Park.

RSP say they aim to have short haul passenger and cargo flights.

RSP plans for construction will be phased over 15 years and will include a total of 19 freight stands and four passenger stands for aircraft as well as warehousing and fuel storage to meet the forecast demand.

There are also plans for education and training, flight training school and business aviation.


  1. What would have been preferable would have been if this had been discussed with the group that has been working on regenerating the port for the last five years plus, rather than denying any interest. Oh dear, oh dear… not impressed. At all.

    • john, when have the likes of them cared about us
      they do not care about people it is a money making racket for them only x
      yes, they should have spoken to people to whom it concerns but
      proves that labour are not worthy of leadership yet again

      • John is very important
        and FORS has nothing to do with this news
        suggest you keep to the topic

        angry of Ramsgate

        sounds like a failed ex leader of the council or Barry

        • No Rebecca Hooper I am neither of the above. Just a normal resident of Ramsgate. Lived here a very long time.

          • In the great scheme of things he isn’t but anyone who watched the video in Ramsgate Market with JD browbeating a lady to keep her away from Craig would remember how important he thought he was

  2. Tony F making it up as he goes along again. Fly in the cargo goods then unload them and put them on a boat then unload them again at Port of London? Sure.

    Is there a karaoke song called Clutching at Straws?

    • and those figures do not add up either
      he has no clue
      he has nothing to work with
      it is a new set up company and trying to do us over again
      and if I find in FOI that money has been given to you again MR F I will report you for stealing and not returning the money like last time
      things here are not forgotten at all evil person stealing from us from a promise you made and yes I have proof

    • I smell another rat! Perishable goods? By the time they are flown in, unloaded, trucked to the Harbour, in sufficient numbers, loaded onto a barge, floated down the Thames, unloaded, and trucked to where ever its going, it will have perished! Duurh!

      This is probably another excuse to justify RSP/Tony Freudman’s monthly retainer from the American Hedge Fund backers! In any case to obtain a DCO it must be in the National Interest, so just how can floating a barge load of daffodils down the Thames be in the National Interest?

      • would you want to eat blueberries etc. that have been sailed up the Thames in empty garbage containers?

      • Dumpton, if you knew anything about the DCO process, the Acceptance stage of it requires certification by the Planning Inspectorate that the project is an NSIP within the statutory terms of the Planning Act 2008. The subsequent Examination afforded opponents and supporters and the Applicant with opportunities to provide reasoned arguments concerning that point but in the end the Secretary of State for Transport has an almost completely unfettered discretion to determine what weight to give any of that when reaching his decision. Anyone betting against the DCO being granted would be a complete fool, and no Judicial Review of any consented DCO project has EVER been successful. Do you feel lucky?

        • R. John Pritchard. God knows why you or any other local resident is so keen on living near an airport. But this DCO project is one submitted by an unknown company, it is not intended to benefit the country as a whole but the anonymous investors in RSP who conceal their funds in a tax haven.

          Heathrow’s third runway has been deemed unlawful. How lucky do you feel about the potential success of an application to build an airport from scratch in a poor situation with unsuitable transport links and next to a town of 40,000 people?

        • The DCO is supposed to have had all the questions asked and answered before it lands on the recused SoS’s desk
          So why are there still questions outstanding?

          Someone isn’t doing their job

        • Interesting that you compare the Manston DCO to all the others. The fact is that all other DCOs are for something new – not to reinstate something that has failed several times before.

  3. and do you have a border for contamination against corona virus at all at the port because you should have
    and who knows what money you gave your pal gloag and souter of offshore leaks 50 lothian square the fact you embezzled funds puts me off you
    leave thanet alone we do not want criminals here

    • The whole idea of there being a new airport at Manston is ridiculous. It’s in an extremely poor position- of what area could it be a hub ? The environmental consequences are nothing any sensible person would wish inflicted on their town and its surroundings. Britain, believe it or not, is supposed to be aiming for carbon neutral status. And not before time.

      Using the Thames to transport cargo could indeed be better than using lorries. But when there’s got to be a brand-new cargo airport created before this bright idea can (sorry) take off- then it bloody well won’t be better.

    • I did not want it thanks muchly I can speak for myself and

      could not make it up what a load of vexatiousness are you Gale in disguise

      we are people
      we should decide what is put here not
      could not make it up as you go along bit like MR F and his merry wind of force behind him who sits on the aviation committee
      what a corrupt government we have and conflict of interests
      people landed here and died on manston and you want to build house or
      and MR F where is your fleet of planes and
      lets hear your jobs creation for thanet is that pipe dreams too get more pipes on the aquifer which manston sits on
      least we not forget the Thor poisoning of the major aquifer

      still could not make it up really!!!!

      what a carry on

  4. you will need lorries MR F to take the freight from the planes will you not
    and you need a fleet of vessels which you do not have
    no, you will be taking your pidgeon ideas and floating the boat down swannee river #youarenotwelcome here
    you had a chance to make the airport a success but decided to build houses but the companies failed and we threw cash at you and you not paid it back now you owe us big time

  5. Another fantasy from Mr Freudman and RSP, polluting trucks from Manston to the port and electric boats up the Thames?! The sooner that the DCO gets refused the better and the threat of cargo planes flying over Ramsgate is removed then the town can get on with further development of the already successful tourism and leisure sector where its real future lies. Real and sustainable jobs will come from this and give the country the chance to achieve net zero by 2050 as demanded by the law.

  6. Trolls ah pre-empting the sensible comments eh
    Well in the full press release Dear Tone says Manston will be Carbon Neutral
    What is Carbon Neutral about
    Flying in Cargo (at least Heathrow offsets Carbon by using PAX)
    loading trucks (don’t make me laugh Carbon Neutral) and driving them to Ramsgate Port
    Loading said cargo onto non-existent electric ships
    Off loading at wharves somewhere in London
    Carbon Neutral my ar*e
    Now let’s see why not fly into Heathrow or Transship to London Gateway

    • and the boating pool is up for grabs too mr F maybe you use that initiative and buy it for the people but you have no money of your own
      best you could do is pedal power boats from the boating pool
      and tell me the history of a newly set up company has with aviation
      you had us before with plane station …wiggins

  7. 1994 – Freudmann joins Wiggins, a property development company. He gives Wiggins the idea of buying up old military airports for development and is made responsible for airport acquisition. Wiggins’ focus is on buying: “former military bases with ample availability of surrounding land which can be developed using the real estate experience of Wiggins.” Sound familiar?
    1999 – Wiggins buys Manston Airport.

    2000 – Freudmann and Wiggins go on a buying spree. Wiggins acquires Odense airport in Denmark in a joint venture (JV) with the local authority. As part of the deal Wiggins will get “exclusive development rights over 400 acres of land.” Potentially very lucrative, no? The JV is later ended by the local authority because the rent hadn’t been paid by Wiggins. A chunky financial settlement is agreed against Wiggins in 2005.

    2000 – Wiggins acquires a 25 year lease for Smyrna Airport, Tennessee, USA. The plan is to develop the airport and have it as Wiggins’ corporate HQ. Wiggins said at the time that 14 more airports would be acquired in 2000. Yes, 14. In 2003 Wiggins surrenders the lease for Smyrna.

    2001 – Wiggins takes a lease from the Czech MoD for Pilsen airport. A deal is made with BAE to redevelop the airport. Nothing much happens. When Wiggins (by then called Planestation) goes belly up in 2005, Pilsen is sold.

    2001 – Wiggins acquires 80% of Lahr airport, Germany. During Wiggins’ ownership, redevelopment plans come to nothing. Lahr is sold to Babcock & Brown in 2005 when Planestation goes under.

    2001 – Wiggins acquires Schwerin Parchim airport in Northern Germany alongside a nice EU grant to develop it. There are issues (again) with non-payment of rent. The agreement is terminated in 2005 and Wiggins settles for 3m Euro.

    2001 – Wiggins takes a 43% stake in Cuneo-Levaldigi airport, Italy. Wiggins withdraws in 2004 having made heavy losses despite serious investment by the Italian Government.

    2001 – Wiggins agrees a deal to build and operate an international airport in Ajman, UAE. An $800m plan to redevelop the airport comes to nothing and is abandoned in 2003.

    2001 – The Financial Reporting Review Panel criticises Wiggins for five years of over-positive reporting of its financial results. When the accounts are redrawn, it’s clear that Wiggins is operating at a significant loss. This is a long time before EUJet is even dreamed of. It’s a popular myth that EUJet broke Planestation. EUJet didn’t help, that’s true, but Wiggins/Planestation was mired in debt well before EUJet came along. And Freudmann had a big part to play in the Planestation demise because he was out snapping up unsuccessful airports.

    2003 – Trading in Wiggins shares is suspended to give the company a chance to sort itself out.

    2004 – Wiggins takes a lease to operate the international side of Melbourne Airport, USA. It says that Melbourne will replace Smyrna airport in the Wiggins portfolio. The project is just starting when Planestation goes under in 2005.

    2004 – Wiggins takes on Borgond Airport, Hungary, in a JV withthe local authority. Work had not begun when Planestation went under in 2005.

    2004 – Wiggins becomes Planestation.

    2004 (May) – Wiggins buys 30% of EUJet.

    2004 – Turnaround expert brought in to rescue Planestation. He says:

    “When I first came here we were spending money to no particular end. Last year we spent £11 million maintaining dormant airports. The previous year £13.5 million.”

    He says that Planestation will no longer be “an acquirer of assets and a stealer of ideas”.

    Others say: “… Planestation has been one of the most woeful ventures ever to grace the London Stock Exchange. Over the past ten years the group, previously known as Wiggins, has raised more money, north of around £115 million than its actual market valuation. With this cash it built up an international chain of seven (hitherto largely dormant) airports and an assortment of property interests and assets in the UK. Apart from property disposals, it has generated little in the way of revenues, milked its investor base for all they were worth and produced gargantuan annual losses”.

    Take a bow for your part in this “woeful” adventure, Mr Freudmann.

    2004 (Dec) – Planestation buys the rest of EUJet.

    2005 (Feb) – Tony Freudmann is “let go” from Planestation and goes into the travel industry, following the lead of his parents and his brother.

    2005 (July) – Planestation goes into administration. Infratil buys Manston airport from the administrator.

    2005 to 2009 – Tony Freudmann bills Kent County Council for almost £176,000 in consultancy fees, including a £50,000 feasibility report into starting up flights from Manston to Virginia.

    2006 – KCC invests £289,000 in Freudmann’s Manston to Virginia plan. Not a single plane takes off.

    2011 – Local authority in Germany puts the running of Lahr Airport out to tender again following Babcock & Brown’s failure to develop it successfully.

    2012 – Infratil puts Manston on the global market.

    2012 – Tony Freudmann takes over Lahr Airport for Integeral Investments Ltd. Integeral was established in May 2008 by Sanjeev Joshi and Daryn Soards. Douglas Maggs is also involved.

    2012 – Local Press at Lahr comment that the airport’s workers are not being paid. Tony Freudmann says he has no comment to make as it is a “private matter”.

    • Well done for posting those comments Rebecca, the above two links lead you to some startling news that should be published so that the local people and those lender share holders of RSP can see what nonsense this all is. If the DCO was ever to unfortunately be awarded then there would be little doubt of further embezzlement by these conmen and their accomplices. The local MP’s are both involved with this 100% too. Sir Roger gale takes every chance he can to represent RSP. It is pure and simple this is about taking money and nothing else. Why are we not being told about this in the press as is leaked in those amazing reports linked? We are only being fed one side. If the DCO was passed then it would be the biggest mistake after what happened with the Port of Ramsgate and the previous secretary of State for Transport Chris Greyling who tried to fool everyone too for his friends and neighbour. I knew there was corruption in Government with ministers giving UK money to buisness friends with the help of MP’s but this airport con is just blatant now.

  8. I have to say I am shocked you choose to publish this utter rot. What next barges pulled by the unicorns ? I have read some crap in my time but this takes the biscuit. How is that ever going to be cost effective for cargo. Just fly it into Stansted or East Midlands etc job done. No wonder Thanet suffers a lack of investment any body thinking of locating here must be laughing their heads off that the locals listen to absolute **** like this.

    • There are two sides in this article Ramsgate resident. The fact is the PLA is in talks and that is newsworthy. Your view is echoed in the article by Mr Styles.

    • This is known as a fluff piece at least Kathy didn’t make the mistake of calling Freudmann the owner of Manston like that other lot.
      The owner of Manston is HLX Nominees registered in Tortola BVI that well known capital of ML

  9. RSP are not donating £1m to plant tree only a small percentage and they are not being planted in Ramsgate which will bear the brunt of the noise and pollution.

    • And at each planting Gale and Fraudmann have their RSP platform with flags flying high advertising the airport. I don’t know how that is allowed as I thought the money came through other means. The tree planting should not be an advertising photo shoot for a freight airport that will produce pollution that a few trees would never offset.
      BTW RSP is only saying in the story above that it will make the ground based industy pollution free within the timescale given, not the aircraft using the airport !

  10. Publishing a time line is also absurd. The timing will depend on demand, well erm… last time I looked it was resoundingly proven there is no demand.

    And on the requirements of users.

    Which users are these? The freeze dried little fishes?

    Any trees bunged in for good measure?
    Otters? How about speedboat for perishable foods?


  11. Oh and the PLA are in talks but is that like the DoT were in talks with a certain ferry company?

  12. I suspect RSP has rung up the PLA and that’s as far as it goes your article gives the impression it’s the PLA instigating negotiations. RSP has form with regard to making claims that are not true. They stated during the consultation last year they had “applied to the CAA to save time” that turned out to be a lie.

  13. I rang Virgin Atlantic today to pitch them my idea of solving their Heathrow problem by flying passengers into Newquay then transferring them to minibus, driving them to Bristol and then transferring them again onto an original 1970s space hopper to bounce their way along for the final leg of their journey to central London.

    Thus I am “in talks with” Virgin Atlantic.

    Can I have a news story please?

  14. Honesty its like that sit around getting pissed than someone shouts out “I know we you put it all on a boat and shove it up the Thames !!

    You cant take this company seriously.

    • It wouldn’t make sense economically to fly freight into Manston then truck it to Ramsgate port and load onto boats to take onwards to Tilbury or other Thames docks to then be collected by more trucks and taken on the rest of it’s journey. That would be crazy which no business would contemplate. Speed is of the essence with most freight and it will always be taken on the quickest most economical route with least effort. Harebrained plans like these are worthy of April 1st though.

  15. Nobody could deny that TF hasn’t given us a good few belly laughs over the years, and the gift that keeps on giving isn’t done yet. Let’s just remind ourselves that air-freight is, by far, the most expensive way of transporting freight. Now let’s add the cost of loading it onto a lorry, driving it down to the dock, loading it onto an “electric” boat, sailing it up to London, unloading it onto another lorry and taking it to a distribution centre. Just to complete the picture, compare that with the cost of flying it straight into Heathrow and unloading straight into the distribution centre. You see, Mr. Freudmann always sounds so plausible until you start trying to put some numbers on his wild, mad-cap schemes.

  16. This in depth reporting of pure fantasy which is demonstrable nonsense isn’t helping Thanet being taken seriously. It really isn’t. Anyone unsure of whether Tony Freudmann is a fantasist will have their minds made up now. I mean, combining the fastest and most expensive form of transport with the slowest and cheapest gives you… um, the slowest and most expensive cargo route. Genius! The real piece of ingenuity is combing an unprofitable loss making sea port and air port – that’s a first.
    Please give us some news not worthy of April the 1st.

    • So, you are saying people would rather not know this was taking place and would rather not be armed with that information? Whether they think it is a waste of time or whether they think it is feasible, people should not have the information that an established organisation such as the PLA is taking part in these talks? And by the same token parties that object to the plan should not have the platform to respond to the idea of the talks (and the climate issue)? Perhaps nothing should be reported until it has actually happened and then we can all say “why didn’t we know about this before so we could do something about it.” Perhaps you would rather read the other report that is exclusively Mr Freudmann with not a peep or a sentence from anyone with a different view to his?

      • Organisations like the DoT can be taken in by the likes of Seabourne Ferries even to the extent of giving SF money.
        Whereas the locals knew it was crap, told our MP’s it was crap and yet it appeared in the press. The trouble is although it was known it was discussed as if it were real. It cost the Govt £39M when Eurotunnel sued.
        So what’s the answer Kathy post it knowing it is a load of rubbish or ignore it?

        • The answer is talks are taking place and who knows what will result from that. Being informed is better than being in the dark, and the same goes for Seaborne. If you do not have the details how are you supposed to know whether action needs to be taken? People will say ‘why weren’t we told?’ if money is spent or decisions made.

  17. how many other seaside /tourist towns in England want a cargo hub fly at 500 ft above their town centre ?

    i mean this has to be the funniest idea yet, as others have said how in their right mind flys into the bottom right hand corner of the UK , unloads onto a wagon to take the container down to the port , where a crane lifts it of onto a boat, which than chucks up the thames to be unloaded by crane at london docks put on another wagon and than moved round the country.

    why not just bring it in on a big cargo ship in the first place , or fly into an airport which is central to the country !

    when this get kick out will they being trying to put an airport at Landsend ?

  18. “RSP plans for construction will be phased over 15 years and will include a total of 19 freight stands for aircraft […] to meet the forecast demand.”
    Oh dear. According to all the experts, there is no demand!

    • Well said, the 2019 IATA report on air freight showed that demand was down 3.3% and capacity was up 2.1%. Absolutely no need for any new air freight capacity in the UK. It already exists in locations properly connected to the motorway and rail networks and with Avgas pipelines. This is all a pipe dream , there is no viable business case and I am certain it will end in no operational airport at Manston but with RSP ‘reluctantly’ applying for planning to build both commercial and residential property on the redundant airfield in huge numbers and blaming the climate emergency.

  19. Goods such as bulk cargoes, time independent , lend themselves to transportation by sea/river/canal.
    Bulk ores, aggregates, oil. As the piece says, building materials and rubbish.
    On the other hand, air cargo is suited to high value, low density and time critical cargoes.
    There seems to be a huge mismatch in Mr Freudmann’s proposed scheme:
    First, no one is going to fly bulky, heavy, low value cargoes anywhere, especially if there are alternatives;
    If you’ve got a cargo on a plane and fir some absurd reason decide to stop 100 miles short of your destination to put it on trucks, then why not leave it on trucks for the last leg?
    Have you seen the speed at which lighters (not barges) move up the Thames there are speed restrictions!). You’d have the absurd situation that it would take as long to fly your cargo from its source to Manston as it would to transport it the rest of the way. Just leave it on the plane for an extra 20 minutes, and fly to EMA.

  20. An extraordinary amount of negativity, pessimism and bias expressed in the comments here, and also a rather muted response from the Labour council leader who one might hope would welcome the possibility of jobs and incoming investment with open arms. Fortunately I believe the largely silent majority in Thanet have a lot more imagination, ‘can do spirit’ and common sense than listening to some of the more vocal opponents of the RSP project might lead you to believe.

    Aviation and transport generally is changing fast in response to climate change, as it must given that cessation of all global trade and cargo is clearly not an option. RSP has already said that the airport itself will be carbon neutral, and aircraft technology is evolving rapidly. Necessity is the mother of invention. Ten years ago electric cars with a range beyond a few miles were a pipe dream. Look at them now. New technology often takes a few years to iron out the problems, but solar powered electric barges will come, as will efficient, climate friendly aviation technologies.

    Instead of whingeing about Manston based on outdated memories of how things used to be, how about embracing the reopening of the airport as a golden opportunity to put Thanet at the heart of a 21st century global green transport revolution?

    • dearie me
      Listen to yourself
      Please post here your aircargo experience or maybe have a chat to Sally Fiction she did at least tell the Inspectors she has no experience Oh and her plans were never checked for viability.

    • I imagine many of those that have commented have actually read or heard the answers that RSP provided to the Planning Inspectorate and to the Secretary of State re climate change and net zero.

      In a few words – No Evidence given Airport Carbon Neutral.

      Saying that they have contributed to a £1 miliion fund (funded mostly of public monies and volunteers) does not make an airport net zero.

      Saying you will use Thanet Parkway station (funded by public money and money from TDC at a cost of £2 million!) and a shuttle bus does not make you net zero.

      Electricity for huge cold warehouses for perishables and pharma even empty emit huge amounts of GHG. Where is the net zero plan for that?

      The list goes on and on.

      Btw the types of planes for dedicated freight cannot be electric planes. Electric planes – when they happen – will be for short haul passenger flights. Not dedicated freighters which are typically conversions of much much much older planes and the biggest polluters. These planes are not net zero planes!

      I am depressed by this article and comments too but for a different reason.

      Success stories about Ramsgate are less written about and commented on. I suspect because unlike TF people are so busy trying to make it without help from councillors and MPs that they don’t prepare press releases for Kathy. TF I imagine does. He really hasn’t got a lot on so I am sure he does have the time.

      MPs are so hell bent on this idea that funding opportunities and other private investors for Ramsgate seem to be missed /not pursued. I don’t see them championing for us in the HoC looking at Hansard.

      How lovely it would have been if they had championed QEQM in this way. Attracting staff and public money to the QEQM.

      Instead our draft local plan was stalled and taken over by RSP lovers so that now we don’t have one adopted or one that has a SEA. And due to these actions – which Councillors were repeatedly warned against and told we would get more houses – we are getting more and more houses!!! Plus no CIL in place still! Which means we miss out on money from developers.

      Tony, Craig and Roger brain farts and telling fibs (passenger numbers that have been reported are wildly inflated and if go ahead have a large number of operational restrictions, the proposed airport is not “spade ready”, there is still no sight of these anonymous investors etc. etc.) are depressing.

      The Secretary of State on 17 January asked another I think 30 questions.

      The answers from statutory bodies, local authorities, organisations and objectors to these SoS questions are interesting reading.

      If you are cross with anyone Jane B I suggest you read these submssions. RSP have let you down not the people here who are voicing their frustration, concern and anger that this is still being talked about instead of a properly funded, viable, evidenced, environmentally sound, people friendly, healthy project that will build on Ramsgate’s successes, heritage and really enhance our town. Well at least that is how I feel. Apologies for speaking for others.

      • It wasn’t a press release, I do many positive stories for Ramsgate and the majority of those aren’t press releases either

        • I wouldn’t say that any story threatening an airport with aircraft overflying Ramsgate is a “positive story”.

          • Aircraft stories aren’t the only ones I write, in fact they are very rare as there are so many other things that matter to people.

    • Jane B….Thankyou. At last a sensible voice. Most in Thànet are so fed up with trying to reason with or reply to these hysterical Manston Airport antis. We see the same names spouting their rubbish over and over again, filling up the pages with their anti Manston misguided hysterical comments. Most people in Thanet and Hernbay just sit back and read and laught at the stuff they come out with. They are best ignored.

  21. Well said Jane B. All these dreadful comments above just go to show it is a matter of urgency to get Manston Airport up and running and to embrace this plan if possible. If it was all as preposterous as they suggest they wouldn’t all be so desperately squealing like distressed pigs.
    Many of these here are long term Manston-moaners going back over the years, and frankly they need something better to do. The tide is against them and they know it, and they are getting desperate. The sooner it happens the better. Many of this lot will then shut up and stop making such embarrassing fools of themselves. Just like the EU Remoaners. Of course nothing is certain but as the old saying goes, the only way to truly fail is never to try. They will not see the new opportunities on offer here, they will not adapt, and will suffer the fate of all who do not move with times – they will go extinct. You are right Jane, they are stuck in the past with respect to Thanet, Manston Airport, aviation in general technology in general, and economics and the way all of it is responding to modern challenges. Ramsgate also is not a quaint seaside resort as it is too built up, too full of traffic and only getting more so. Meanwhile they just expend huge volumes of hot air. The sooner we move forward and let the tides of change wash away this degenerate sclerotic and burdensome irrelevant mental paralysis and catatonia the better – in Thanet and the UK as a whole!

    • Even your name is a lie.
      The Manston title doesn’t say anywhere that you cannot build houses on the airfield. It only costs £3 from Land registry.

    • I think the people who do not want to live near an airport because of noise and pollution really do not deserve the childish rudeness which is so often demonstrated in these comments. Don’t any of them know- can’t any of them imagine- what it would be like to do so?
      NO HOUSES ON AIRFIELDS EVER, why do you use a pseudonym? So that those you insult won’t know who you are, of course.Rather than insult people, tell them what the benefits of a cargo airport outside Ramsgate would be.

      I’m not usually rude to people but this most recent totally bonkers suggestion seems to have got to not only me but several other people who hate the thought of an airport destroying everything that’s been gradually built up in Ramsgate.

      • If it is so sure to fail, why do you bother constantly rising to these articles with the vehemence you do? Surely, just ignore and let it all fizzle out as you are sure it will? What you do and what you say do not match

        • People who comment criticizing the idea of an airport at Manston do so because it’s still a threat and their opinions have not changed.

  22. Yet again the pro manston dont say how it’s going to make money
    No fuel
    No decent roads is manston runway bigger enough for modern cargo planes
    Putting the cargo on a truck to move to the harbour !
    Just to take it of a few hours later and out it on another truck to get round the M25

    There us no way in a million years aviation fuel will be brought in on trains.

    It’s alright but your faith in this man who has been kicked out of his profession, but I guess that’s thanet all over , it’s about time we had another shielk walking around the harbour….

  23. No houses in airfield ever have a look at the local plan. No houses at Manston has resulted in Birchington doubling in size and every greenfield site in Thanet being lined up to have have houses built on. It was never houses or airport it is houses AND airport. If you think Freudmann’s latest fairy story is viable I would suggest you do some research.

  24. Over the years Mr. Freudmann has been like the Pied Piper, merrily piping away as he dances around Thanet, pursued by an army of children; many of them well into middle-age. Every time he strikes up a new tune the press jump on board, dutifully reporting his next fantastical business idea. As we all know they all fizzle out but, by then, the press has lost interest. What’s particularly galling is that the council had the opportunity to work with bona fide regeneration specialists who had already rescued the old Pfizer site and were prepared to work their magic on the redundant airport. But, those in authority in Thanet weighed it up and decided to go with the guy who’s track record speaks for itself. At what point will Thanet’s politicians be held to account for the decisions they have made? Historically, they have always backed the airport and it has always failed. They all backed the Pleasurama development…and it failed. They backed the rescue of Dreamland. Not only is it failing, it has bankrupted the council. Thanet’s politicians have a history of failure and, in backing Mr. Freudmann they’re doing it all over again.

  25. Kathy from your article “However the PLA always welcomes constructive approaches to make more use of the Thames for waterborne freight”
    if they mean what they say then RSP contacted the PLA unless they are confused or misquoted
    The clue is in the word approaches

    • Not really because approaches to could mean methods of, which is why I have asked instead of guessing

      • whatever the method of approach it means RSP approached the PLA.
        It is doubtful the PLA even knew Freudmann exists
        Some might agree that should have still been the case
        BTW has the defence infrastructure Organisation sorted out the HRDF?

    • Ramsgate isn’t on a waterway. It is called the North Sea or English Channel
      Geography not taught in schools any more?

      • The Thames Estuary/English Channelis is a relatively small and shallow area compared to many international waters where barges navigate quite happily. Have you ever flown over the St Lawrence or the Great Lakes God Help Us? They’re BIG. Lake Superior is 150 miles wide and 350 miles long.St Lawrence Seaway is 370 miles long. By contrast Dover to Calais is 21 miles. Ramsgate to London is about 75 miles by sea. Thames barges from London were sailing the North Sea and visiting European ports way back in the 19th century. I cant see it being a problem for much larger vessels now.

        • will RSP be bringing in building materials and then bringing back rubbish to Ramsgate to fly it out.
          Just in case you didn’t know google London Gateway & Tilbury docks and the try Sheerness docks
          Fly in cargo
          load into trucks
          offload 2 miles down the road
          Sail down to London
          offload to trucks
          Which bit of that is Carbon neutral?

      • It’s water, it’s sailed upon, carries working traffic? Might not be man-made, but those facts make it a water-way don’t they? Dufus

  26. The courts have said no two third runway Boris Johnson said the government won’t appeal against it the report on Manston was delayed why!! Is it possible that the government has influenced this decision to see if the courts went against Heathrow! Its well known Boris wants more for the North by the decision on Manston going against an airport hub it gives Boris the chance for a hub central to the country giving the North what he promised if he can get it through he will be a Saint to all northerners and if it is anyway near to the fast new rail line HS2 he will have it all trains to transfer goods throughout the country less co2 and good for the climate. This I see as good possibility. And why is everyone moaning about Kathy she is informing everyone if she hadn’t reported it you would moan that you had not been informed Kathy is on a hiding to nothing with the residents of thanet. At least I will thank Kathy Brailes for reporting both sides of the story. Thank you Kathy.

    • sustainable aviation fuel still produces combustion
      combustion also produces CO2
      Where is SAF Carbon Neutral?

    • Don’t waste your breath Jane, as ‘God help us’ clearly does not understand what sustainable means

  27. Yes, I read that article too. I hope you also read KCC, TDC, DIO/MOD, Network Railway, Natural England’s etc recent submissions in response to the recent SoS Consultation.

    TF says that he is talking about “moving freight landed at Manston airport on a route from Ramsgate Port and up the River Thames”. TF is silent on GHG (Greenhouse Gases)/ carbon emissions from the HGVs that will allegedly carry the freight to the Ramsgate Port and the HGVs that will carry it from the River Thames to whomever in the UK that may import this freight.

    It seems that RSP are only importing freight through Manston in the future or is freight to be exported out from Manston by being driven from somewhere in the UK to the PLA, put on a barge to Ramsgate Port then a HGV and then put a dedicated freighter? Port of Tilbury is just nearby and all these stages emit GHG and leak time.

    As you will be aware from the article you have cited the barges are potentially crewless which is interesting re the jobs numbers. Part of RSP’s claim is a lot of indirect jobs which included HGV drivers etc. So that is an interesting slant; promoting a significant reduction in jobs.

    The barges are also “being developed in the Netherlands with €7m in subsidies from the EU and additional funds from the ports involved” so I am not sure how these barges will be funded as we are now out of the EU/transitioning out and our port is losing money.

    I cannot find anywhere on the PLA website anything about electric powered vessels/ barges. I wonder if anyone could be so kind as to direct me to where any information can be found?

    • Samara look up electric powered boats being used in docks in Holland and loads of information comes up from 2018 onwards being used for 24 containers per barge hope you find what you want there. Chris

      • How many containers per aircraft?
        I would imagine that cargo in aircraft is palletised rather than containerised.
        How many aircraft cargoes, and how many trucks, would it take to fill an electric barge with a capacity for 24 containers?

  28. Hate to burst your bubble, fantasists, but ….

    1) RSP “business plan” was based on luring “a big e-commerce company” to operate air freight from Manston

    2) There’s this e-commerce company called Amazon (you may have heard of them?) who have already invested in the largest fulfilment centre in Europe – 550,000 sq ft, 4 floors, 18km of conveyor belts. And where is it? Oh yeah. Tilbury Docks.

    3) Tilbury Docks is 43min drive from Stansted Airport – which already operates dedicated cargo flights .. and has spare capacity

    4) Tilbury Docks is also located near… Y’know .. Tilbury Docks. So no need for that plane/truck/barge/truck combo

    But, sure … tell me again how this plan put forwards by a man with 26 failed ventures in the last 25 years totally makes sense and deserves our serious consideration. And if you’re still thinking that we can achieve anything with just a bit more positivity then I’ve got magic beans I’d like to sell you sometime too. Maybe you can “make an approach” and we can get “in discussions” so IOTN can write a piece about that too?

    One more thing … Did you catch Kelly Tolhurst, (you know … The Aviation Minister?), referring to Manston plans in terms of it being “a small regional airport” in House of Commons yesterday? Doesn’t exactly scream NSIP and 10,000 jobs, does it?

  29. Barges work really well on canals and rivers. They tend to sink when they get caught in a Force 10 off North Foreland.

  30. People insulted??? That’s a laugh coming from you Marva Rees and all other anti airport people. I have never seen over recent years a more insulting bunch of people than your group. But then you belong to the entitled right-on believing sort who think you are above reproach. Degenerate. What’s been built up in Ramsgate??? …now that is priceless! Do you mean the dossers in shop doorways or the drug dealers on street corners or the constant pervading whiff of cannabis smoke any time of night – or middle of the (working) day lol! Or might it be the abandoned idle port, disused airport or whatever else has closed down or gone tits up in the last decade? You people would really make me laugh if you were not so tragic. God help us – what sort of a nihilist are you?? All you do is decry and negate. You seem not to stand for nor support anything. By Christ Thanet has such a pocket of dust-bowl insularity and puerile adolescent mockery as displayed by you people who are quite clearly much much older than spoilt aggy stroppy teenagers by years anyway – if not by mentality. It is the same old names all the time. Do you realise what a crashing bore you few are, as well as an amusement and laughing-stock. Please keep it up actually as it is very entertaining and has provided me and friends with many a bloody good laugh whenever Manston appears in the local rags

    • Your response simply reinforces Ns Rees’ opinion of those in favour of an airport.
      Instead of putting forward a factual logical argument in favour of aviation, at the very least you put forward a wish list, but all too often you resort to insults.

  31. Just who is going to buy and run these mythical electric barges? I doubt it would be RSP as they haven’t got the funds to even build the airport. I very much doubt the PLA have contacted RSP as I would think they would have done due diligence and seen what a con merchant Fraudman is and don’t want to be seen as a laughing stock

    • You fall back on the old boring fictitious cliche of Riveroak has no money zzzzzzzzz. That’s why they have spent £13M. You are a waste of time Ramsgate Resident. Head full of garbage like a lot of Thanet residents who need to crawl out from under their rock and recognise a world outside of this little island. It is a lot harder to make up a reality for the big wide world than a fuzzy little peninsula

      • seriously when you insult at least do it from a position of strength
        RSP (assuming their claim is believed) state they have spent at least £34M
        That is more money than Planestation under Freudmann went under for in 2005

        At least the reality of RSP is consistent
        Snakeoil salesmen to the end

        Who owns Manston? Do you care it is owned by HLX Nominees registered in Tortola BVI but then no one supporting the airport cares about that because belief is all you have.

      • You fall back on the old boring personal insults typical of those supporting Manston.
        In its DCO application , RSP made it clear that though they had sufficient funds pledged to them to see them through the DCO process, the bulk of the money (they hoped) would be raised by appealing to investors for the >£300M required to develop the airport.
        So no, they don’t have the money.

  32. Blah blah blah zzzzzz. Certainly couldn’t care less what any anti airport people come out with as all you do is complain and slag off. And you have been petty and nasty from the word go – as you were about the airport before that travesty with Gloag. Benjamin Franklin had you few summed up pretty well in one of his characteristically pithy quotes: ‘Any fool can criticise, condemn and complain – and most fools do’. You are welcome to your grey miserable little world devoid of ambition to do anything beyond the ‘norm’

  33. You clearly know nothing about modern business and how it operates Andrew. I suggest you take a trip outside your island comfort zone and see how the big bad world works? Alternatively you are so full of your own importance you look down on ‘ordinary people’ and in a typically patronising way assume we know nothing. Either way you are a pontificating oaf who won’t stop whining. (Now – what was that quote about ‘fools’ again?)

    • Presumably York Aviation, Falcon Consultancy, Altitude Aviation amongst others “clearly know nothing about modern business and how it operates “?
      And look, I didn’t say one unpleasant word about you. Or whine at all.

    • Are BAN HOUSES and NO HOUSES the same person? If so, why have they bothered changing their pseudonym?

  34. There is a huge difference between raising and spending £16.5m on a tangible asset – e.g. a large plot of land in the South East – and raising £300m for an idea – especially one of Tony Freudmann’s.

    Just about the only thing RSP has consistently done is they have stubbornly refused to provide any details or evidence of any funds or investors. They failed 2 CPO attempts with TDC because of it and their repeated excuses for this lack of evidence during frequent and intense questioning from the Examining Authority during DCO hearings was – frankly – embarrassing.

    So no, they do not have the money.

  35. Perhaps NO HOUSES etc would like to tell us which airport supporters have been insulted, why they were insulted, and why they did not deserve it.

  36. Marva Rees, there were whole social media pages set up specifically to abuse individuals – and another in the same vein has popped up lately. It is all very retarded and puerile. This kind of behaviour alone has convinced some I know to support Manston Airport and anything associated with it even if Mickey Mouse bought it lol! And so, you appear to suggest airport supporters do deserve insult??

    • On the Opinion pages of IoTN, correspondents fall into two broad categories.
      Those who support Manston: no arguments of any substance put forward, plenty of abuse of those having a different opinion;
      those who oppose the airport, and put forward fact based logically constructed arguments to support their case. They have no need to fall back on insults and name calling.

    • No houses, what ‘social media pages’? Like the one from the Pro supporters called Manston Loud Hailer. Full of vile hate. I have never seen such vile,nasty comments aimed at certain antis.

    • I am not on social media so I don’t know anything about local group,s. I want- I daresay others do too- to know why people have insulted airport supporters personally(if they have) and how they have justified these personal insults (if there are any). They may have said something so appalling that they well deserve to be insulted, but unless someone tells us, we will never know, will we?

  37. RSP were asked countless times by the examiners to produce proof of the money they had supposedly spent on the DCO costs along with where the money to develop the site was coming from and who the investors were but of course they didn’t, instead just coming out with a series of excuses like there was a reorganisation of the company . At the end of the day the company that now owns Manston is an offshore vehicle whose investors are shrouded in secrecy and could be any crook. It seems pro airport supporters think that pointing out facts is insulting, probably because they don’t like them

  38. Now hang on, the only ‘facts’ in any of this are: Most people in Thanet (and Ramsgate) want Manston Airport to be reinstated as just that – an airport. And there is a vocal minority who do not want an airport here in any form. It has been like that since this whole matter began in 2014. ALL of the rest of the above discussion, debate and wrangling is theory, opinion and whatever future events may come to pass – which none of us can know for certain

    • I’m afraid you’re wrong, on several counts.
      The only “proper” survey carried out was one done by TDC some years ago about the introduction of night flights. The majority of respondents was against night flights.
      If you look at the PI’s web site, you’ll see that there is a huge number of responses by members of the public. The majority is against the airport. But there is no way of knowing where such people live: maybe their opinion isn’t as valid if they live in the USA, for example.
      Claims have been made about various petitions and so on purporting to show overwhelming enthusiasm for an airport. None of these petitions has been vetted or validated; most have entries by such worthies as “Nick D. Radar”, “Capt. Biggles” and “Mr R. Suppards”.
      In addition, there is evidence that pro airport people signed petitions many times.
      So saying that the majority of people in Thanet want an airport is a fact is quite wrong.
      What *is* a fact is that every expert opinion (and there are a few, including from York Aviation, consultants to DfT) is broadly in agreement that:
      1) there is no need for additional dedicated air freight provision in the UK;
      2) even if there were, Manston is hopelessly situated geographically to meet that (non existent) need.

    • There is no conclusive evidence base to say that the majority of people in Thanet want / do not want to see an airport reinstated. Anecdotally, people i have spoken to, when asked, say what they want is a small scale regional airport with a mixed operation (like the old days). Of course that is not what RSP have prposed. RSP have based the DCO on a large scale freight operation rising to 10,000 ATMs with the ‘option’ of passenger flights being added at some point in the future.

  39. Most people in Ramsgate want an airport is a fact ?? I don’t think so,in fact quite the opposite looking at the NNF posters up during the examination period and all the submissions sent in from people opposed. Not to mention several meeting full with standing room only. Also the RTC meeting were the overwhelming number of residents who spoke were opposed. So while it may suit you to say support in Ramsgate is a fact it certainly isn’t at all and that is a fact !

  40. Oh and not to mention the majority of Ramsgate councillors were voted in on an anti airport mandate

  41. Well it stirs you lot up when I say how many want an airport. That speaks volumes. You forget the 6 year campaign with thousands of members – that rather dwarfs the meetings you speak of. As for NNF based in Herne Bay, they have been exposed as a fraud more concerned with deflecting housing development away from land between Herne Bay and Canterbury. They are part of the wall paper here now anyway for years and not many people take any notice of them. As for comments on these articles – I only see a handful of contributors and always much the same ones. Apart from the only two ‘facts’ here, all we have are suppositions (including commissioned reports – with their biases). You can also look at vested interests and emotional reactions. It looks quite plain to me which way the wind really blows

    • Bruce
      It doesn’t matter how many people in thanet want an airport, it will be down to cost, and manston is in the wrong place, no fuel line, no railway, no decent roads to name a few

      • You had better get on the hot line and inform RSP of their mistake Big Nose! They obviously do not know where the airport they have just purchased is – I am sure they will be very grateful

        • Bruce

          No mate I will let them swing you along anyone with half a brain cell can manston as an airport is well past its sell by date.

          But if want to believe that aviation fuel will be brought in my tanker or train jog on.
          The logistics , the geographic, no railway, no decent roads.

          Why would anyone bring their goods into the bottom corner of England and than pay through the nose for fuel and haulage.

    • “You forget the 6 year campaign with thousands of members – that rather dwarfs the meetings you speak of.”
      Hilarious how many members on the FB page “Save Manston Airport Association” less than 4000 and that hasn’t changed in the last 3 years.
      population of Thanet 140000 and remember many members of SMAa don’t even live in Thanet. So that is less than 3% and many don’t live in Thanet.

  42. Thousands of supporters who mostly live outside Thanet who it won’t affect. I’ve seen pictures of SMAa meetings barely 30 people on a good day and that is the same old faces with FA all else to do lol , so doesn’t “dwarf” meetings here by people who actually live here in Ramsgate

  43. There was a detailed statistical analysis of every one of the 2,038 relevant representations originally submitted to PINs.

    The majority were against the airport.
    93% of residents associations and established local community groups were against it.

    Of those who supported the DCO plans …

    The vast majority just didn’t want more houses. This is not the same thing is positively supporting development of an airport

    The next most popular statement was connected with RAF and military history. This has absolutely no connection with RSPs cargo hub plans and – in fact – the MoD has put in numerous very strongly worded objections to RSPs plans. Historic England also raised strong concerns re RSPs lack of respect for the heritage of the site and potential archaeological remains

    A distant third on the list for supporters was memories of the small local airport running passenger services. This is not what RSP is proposing and has also proven to be unviable, many times over, for the small catchment area of Thanet

    There is a difference between supporting any of the above things and what RSP is actually proposing.

    There is also a big difference between having 3,500 unverified members of a Facebook group and actual real people in an actual real local community.

  44. Statistician – you make no mention of those who support the RSP cargo hub and are excited at its prospects. They do most certainly exist and comprise the vast majority of airport supporters. I have never seen such a load of pseudo-statistical drivel. PINS submissions is not just a numbers game anyway – quality matters more. Sorry, not convinced by this BS

    • I’n not saying they don’t exist. I’m saying once you strip out all those who just make loud noises about “we don’t want any houses” , (which they then got anyway), military nostalgia, convenient passenger services etc the numbers of people supporting what RSP has actually submitted in its plans become much, much smaller.

      It’s pretty much a mirror of what we see in the comments section here… same during the public hearings, same during the Issue Specific Hearings, the same on Twitter, in recent local elections etc.

      As for the numbers game -vs- quality, I’ve read every single submission put into PINs – many times over – and can very confidently say I know which side has put forwards the more logical, reasoned and well-evidenced arguments. If you think differently, then good luck to you.

      Fortunately, it’s not you who needs to be convinced. It’s the Examining Authority and the Secretary of State. We will all find out by 18 May.

      • Lies, damned lies and statistics. Rubbish Statto. And any submissions against the airport I have seen are just whingeing

        • just 3 words Defence Infrastructure Organisation
          when is Freudmann going to solve that problem because they haven’t been too complimentary about RSP

  45. It was a Manston supporter who first raised the Numbers Game on this thread. The assertion that most people wanted it was roundly shot down.
    So now it’s BS. PINS certainly will look at all the evidence, including that given by Louise Congdon of York Aviation: the evidence which completely rubbished the stuff put up by Sally Dixon of Azimuth Associates.
    If you know something different, why not tell us, with links to your source?

    • Shot down? Don’t make me laugh lol. You just contradicted what was said by the supporter. That does not constitute ‘shot down’ You spout rubbish with which you probably even deceive yourself

  46. This can rumble on forever with us here arguing the toss. Fortunately it is out of all of our hands and in the hands of central government. If good sense and justice prevail the airport will be given the go-ahead and we can look forward to Thanet finally shaking off its economic and social torpor

    • If good sense and justice prevail !!!

      So the pros same old questions that you near answer and no floating containers up the north seas isnt the answer lol it’s the sort of idea you gave when your have been smoking some sweet smelling tobacco

      No fuel , wont be brought in my train , tankers way to expansive.
      No decent road network, no decent rail network, manston in the wrong place geographically. Just a few problems

      Even if it were to open it would be bust in 4 yrs

  47. It does seem that even on the pro sites the faithful need managing
    In psychology managing a cult needs a few people to keep the faithful in line by constantly reassuring them that they are the righteous and everyone that disagrees is the enemy. The shame here is one of the enforcers decided to move out from under the flightpath when he realised that his quiet life was in danger. Proving the old adage “don’t do what I do, do as I say”
    Some might say that the so called antis are disrespectful but it seems when they feel they are safe to comment the mask slips.
    “One or two valiant souls riding into the fray to counter the flagrant nonsensical mantras chanted by the inevitable anties/trolls. (Most of us are too busy/can’t be bothered ). They are getting frantic and desperate at this latest development as the airport becomes more embedded in the future here. It only seems to be about 4 or 5 anties who always inevitably appear on these news articles.”

    No names however I’m sure this enforcer will recognise how disgusting his comments are
    There is a reason the Planespotters cult has no sense of morals.

    • Not that the “pro” members really care but those looking in might see the signs
      eight different “symptoms” that indicate groupthink:

      Illusions of invulnerability lead members of the group to be overly optimistic and engage in risk-taking.
      Unquestioned beliefs lead members to ignore possible moral problems and ignore the consequences of individual and group actions.
      Rationalizing prevents members from reconsidering their beliefs and causes them to ignore warning signs.
      Stereotyping leads members of the in-group to ignore or even demonize out-group members who may oppose or challenge the group’s ideas.
      Self-censorship causes people who might have doubts to hide their fears or misgivings.
      “Mindguards” act as self-appointed censors to hide problematic information from the group.
      Illusions of unanimity lead members to believe that everyone is in agreement and feels the same way.
      Direct pressure to conform is often placed on members who pose questions, and those who question the group are often seen as disloyal or traitorous.

    • Can’t say I’m feeling “frantic and desperate” about the threat of an airport near my home, and I don’t know anyone who does, though most people who talk about airports to me (not that it’s a major topic of conversation, in my experience) don’t want one at Manston.

      So I think whoever said that is exaggerating.

  48. At least us “antis” still live here and haven’t moved from under the flight path unlike certain people who take hypocrisy to new levels. It’s easy to support the airport when you will no longer suffer the noise and pollution from it isn’t it??

  49. All I see and all I read is emotional and sentimental support from some who would prefer to plane spot than welcome housing development. All I see is a community divided by a terrible District Council swapping it’s leader more times than I’ve had hot dinners in order to choose how they’re feeling about the dormant airfield.

    All I see is a DCO unfinished, by a failed businessman with seemingly unfaltering cheerleading enthusiastic support by the plane spotting MP for Thanet North and the airline owning MP for Thanet South. Now we have the plane owning SoS for Transport shoving the decision to his new mate the aviation minister.

    Anyone believing Manston will create 10,000 jobs and the opportunity not to have to drive to Gatwick has believed the lies which drip from RSP almost weekly. When Tony F, or Roger or Craig speaks, an article appears with headlines on ‘progress’ with the usual comments to the rear from a small number of groups who represent many of the residents who don’t want it.

    Again, I would ask. Let’s have an article leading on the concerns. Not any supposed progress status. Besides which, a cargo hub with a dirty flight every 10 minutes is hardly progress is it, whatever way you look at it.

    Just why is Ramsgate so obsessed about landing a cargo plane every ten minutes over the harbour, spitting fuel on us and our houses? Why? It ain’t jobs, it won’t create many. Just what is it? It ain’t passenger flights, there won’t be any. Is it just plain old anti housing development nimbyism?

    • Nope. Even FlyBe wouldn’t have them. This is what they said they pulled out the f Manston in 2010:

      Flybe spokesman Niall Duffy said: “We tried different routes and the numbers simply weren’t there. It’s impossible to sustain routes without the passengers.”

      “Unfortunately for the Manston services it was just impossible to look at those passenger numbers and think that we could sustain the kind of difficulties we were facing.

      “It is fair to say that Manston is one of the airports with the smaller catchment areas in the United Kingdom, and you have Gatwick not too far away.”

      You know you’ve got problems when even FlyBe says your airport isn’t viable.

  50. Kathy Bailes: did you hear anything from the PLA about this Scheme?
    Was it proposed by PLA or RSP?
    I can find nothing about it on either web site.

  51. “Flybe has said it will not be flying from Manston International Airport in Kent after March.

    The airline said it would cease operations there at the end of the winter season.

    Flybe spokesman Niall Duffy said: “We tried different routes and the numbers simply weren’t there. It’s impossible to sustain routes without the passengers.”

    Flybe launched its Manston to Edinburgh service in May 2010.

    Mr Duffy said: “Unfortunately for the Manston services it was just impossible to look at those passenger numbers and think that we could sustain the kind of difficulties we were facing.

    “It is fair to say that Manston is one of the airports with the smaller catchment areas in the United Kingdom, and you have Gatwick not too far away.” ”
    BBC 2011.
    plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose –

    • And of course KLM could only manage 43% seat occupancy during a year of operation. Was the problem advertising or catchment area

  52. Have you googled Libel
    I am surprised such an incorrect libellous statement has been allowed to be published

  53. someone calling into Radio Kent this morning
    “transfer the cargo from Heathrow to Manston and you won’t need to build another runway”
    Something tells me they really don’t do their research

Comments are closed.