Oban Airport

[4th gen Suthen']

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/di ... 34.0.0.php

Just wondering why Argyll and Bute Council are so determined to spend so much on the Oban, Coll and Colonsay airports.........the two islands maybe but why Oban? 2 hours from Glasgow by road.

Of course, I know nothing and there are likely very good reasons for it, but it seems that every single penny for Kintyre is grudged and hard to get.....yet so much has been spent on these projects.

[Mary G]

4th Gen’

You talk a lot of sense – again! Maybe one of the local councillors would like to put the case for the Council’s actions on this one.

The background to this goes back a long way, and – speaking personally – I think that a few more warning bells should have been ringing along the way. There was a problem – mainly about getting Colonsay kids home from secondary school at weekends – and then someone bolted that onto the case for upgrading Oban Airport. I think that was careless opportunism. Sometimes being opportunistic is good – it can help to make a fragile case a good one. In other instances, and I think that this is one, it can distort a whole argument, and possibly not even solve the original problem - which seems to be the case here.

A proper appraisal of the problem, the costs, the risks and the facts, would, as you say, have invested in Coll and Colonsay – but not Oban, in my view. Close to both these islands are three other places with secondary schools that lie less than three miles from excellent licensed Airports: Islay, Tiree and of course Campbeltown. This would have meant the children not continuing with their secondary education in Oban, but rather, going to one of these other three six year secondaries under the Council’s control.

If Oban was seen as preferable for families, perhaps reluctant to change schools, then the option of a helicopter could have been investigated. However, the air-strip option for Coll and Colonsay offers both these islands the other benefits that come form being better connected, ideally through scheduled services, by air.

That sort of full appraisal would have identified the impending sea-plane as serious competition. I think that it is a much more attractive option, being centre-to-centre Oban to Glasgow, and effectively puts the ‘tin-lid’ on the prospects of the Connel airport. What operator will be interested now, even if lukewarm before? And over the years the A82 and 85, are progressively, being upgraded, shortening the driving times.

This is not an original view, but my opinion is that this will transpire to have been a very expensive mistake. I would be interested to know why, with the arrival of the sea-plane service, the Council is continuing with the Oban end of this venture. It could be perceived as ‘throwing good money after bad’.

And meanwhile the Colonsay children spend whole terms in Oban, and only get home at the major holidays. I think that they are the only children in state education in Scotland to endure this, and I for one think that the Council should have acted on this issue long ago. Don’t get me wrong, I will be the first to celebrate if the licensing is sorted, an operator found, services run profitably, the Council recoups its money … and these kids get home at weekends. As they say, I have my doubts if the current course of action is pursued.

[oorly gourlay]

I had occasion to visit what I still class as Connel Airfield last week and I found that it was fairly busy with light aircraft and helicopters involved in a search for a missing man on Mull. This would have been the case, or it would possibly have been busier, under the stewardship of Paul Keegan who, single-handedly, turned it in to a viable, successful business before being usurped by A&BC's grand plan.

While I was there, I met a pilot from Northern ireland who had just flown in and it was his opinion that the runway is too close to Ben Lora, especially if the weather is poor.

I did not know the arrangements for the seaplane landing in Oban Bay until last week when I was on Kerrera and saw it come in to land. I thought it would taxi in to the Oban harbour but no it taxied to a pontoon at Kerrera marina where the passengers were ferried back in to Oban. In the time it took, it would probably have been as quick landing at Connel and allowing the passengers to be driven in to Oban. At least Campbeltown has the option of a direct flight in to Hall Street.

I had a good laugh in May when I landed at Scalasaig pier in Colonsay and was directed by a prominent sign to the "airport" I believe that Coll has a similar sign.

oorly

[Mary G]

That is very interesting information from Oorly, that the sea-plane must take people into Kererra. I was in Kererra about a month ago, and even saw the sea-plane take off from Oban harbour. We did not see it at the pontoons on the island … think I might have noticed it! I take it that the authority for the harbour in Oban has not approved an application from the sea-plane operator to use pier facilities in Oban.

The whole question of harbour authorities is another kettle of fish altogether (sic). Is the Council, by any chance, the harbour authority for Oban? I know that this is the case in some ports; in other instances it is Calmac; sometimes a community convened independent authority.

The direct access to Hall St is first class, and compares very favourably with Oban. It would be interesting to know more. Maybe the Oban Times could throw some light on this.

[oorly gourlay]

For info Mary G.

The situation in Oban is quite convoluted in that, as far as I know, A&BC are the harbour authority who own the small slipways in the bay and the North Pier. The Railway Pier is owned and operated by Calmac as is the South Pier although it is generally used by Oban Port Users Association and the Lighthouse Board pier does not really enter the equation. As there is a lack of suitable sized slipways in the bay, I would have thought that the obvious answer would have been to provide a pontoon for the seaplane similar to the one it uses on the Clyde but that is possibly too simplistic in a tourist trap. I did notice that Kerrera marina was advertising the service quite prominently, so there may be a connection between the two.

oorly

[Mary G]

Is it right that the staff at Oban airport are on 90 days notice of redundancy?

If the Council is baling out, what (if any) attempts were made to find an alternative operator?

[Mary G]

The Oban Airport was an Argyll & Bute conceived project, effectively redeveloping the airfield at North Connel. It received funding from various sources for the capital investment side. But the responsibility for day-to-day operating costs sits squarely with the Council today.

Here are the figures I read, but if anyone has more accurate costs and charges, please share with us. As a Council facility, I daresay a Freedom of Information request could yield the most accurate up-to-date figures. But this analysis is based mainly on the details in the budget papers that were published earlier this year, so they cannot be far off the mark:

Annual operating costs: £1,500,000 – this was NOT explicitly in the budget papers, but is the figure that most people locally say is the annual operating cost.
Annual target number of flights: 700 - as per the Council budget papers
Average landing charge: £45.63 - also in the budget

Other small charges are made for other services, like aircraft parking, so even if all 700 flights yield £100 each, that means:

Annual airport deficit: £1,430,000
Subsidy per landing: £2,042

That means each plane that lands - private planes included - receives a massive subsidy, of 46 times the actual charge paid by each flight.

Can this be right? I'm very happy to amend this if someone can point me to more accurate sources

[petewick]

The biggest waste of public money ever...............live near there and it's rarely used.

[Mary G]

Yes Pete. Thanks for that local insight!

The Council target is for 700 flights per year. Passenger number targets are tiny too - 2,300. So six or seven passengers a day.

All paid for through local Council Tax.