|
|
Post by Biggles on Feb 6, 2011 22:51:49 GMT 1
Pity something can`t be done to link these sort of flights up with the Cruise ship business which sadly is located in the main at Southampton. I guess weight limits on hand and hold luggage will prevent any decent development along this idea. More need to get the Cruise terminal up and running properly ay Liverpool again.
|
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Feb 7, 2011 2:32:06 GMT 1
More need to get the Cruise terminal up and running properly ay Liverpool again. There is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2011 9:28:56 GMT 1
Pity something can`t be done to link these sort of flights up with the Cruise ship business which sadly is located in the main at Southampton. I guess weight limits on hand and hold luggage will prevent any decent development along this idea. More need to get the Cruise terminal up and running properly ay Liverpool again. It's a good point, Biggles. Southampton is a pig of a place to get to if you live north of Birmingham. I suppose the highest percentage of cruise passengers come from the south-east, but a taxi-driver mate of mine says it's a regular run for him, usually with 4 or 6 passengers - and a lot of baggage! Sadly, Liverpool will never be a major cruise port - it's just in the wrong place. |
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Feb 7, 2011 11:13:17 GMT 1
Sadly, Liverpool will never be a major cruise port - it's just in the wrong place. How do you work that out? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2011 12:07:07 GMT 1
Sadly, Liverpool will never be a major cruise port - it's just in the wrong place. How do you work that out? Geography and economics. All the serious money in the UK is in the SE. People from the SE wouldn't want to come to the north to take a boat which is going south. From Southampton, you're instantly out into the English Channel, and you've saved the costs and time of a day's sailing. Of course there's a place for Liverpool in the cruise ship itinerary, when they're cruising northern Europe, but it's never going to be in the big league. |
|
|
|
Post by viscount on Feb 7, 2011 12:34:34 GMT 1
While I usually agree with Garstonboy's input, do I own a differently shaped Atlas? From the Atlantic west of the Brest Peninsular (ie from Canaries/Spain/Mediterranean), Liverpool is not that much further than Southampton, a few hours at around 30mph at most - certainly not "a days extra sailing".
North West Europe and Trans-Atlantic are growing sectors of the Cuising market. Most Mediterranean and Carribean are fly-cruises.
The Port of Liverpool is well placed as a Port for the whole of the UK, not just the south coast as Southampton is. M6 & M62 (& to a degree M56) grant Liverpool Port great connectivity from north, south, east and North Wales ie a great proportion of UK's population. While the passenger rail network to Liverpool may no longer be excellent, it is still good. Agreed the wealth of Britain is skewed to the South East, but the cruise passenger base has grown significantly beyond the SE's super rich. Even I'm off on a cruise shortly - I'm neither even vaguely rich nor SE based!
|
|
|
|
Post by tonyspeke on Feb 7, 2011 13:35:06 GMT 1
Liverpool is probably easier to get to than Southampton for anybody living north of Watford Gap and maybe preferrable for many more.
A proper cruise terminal at the Pier Head, with long term parking and a bus link with Lime St Station, will be successful.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonyspeke on Feb 7, 2011 13:41:54 GMT 1
The reduction in aircraft size is due to SOU being a Jetstream base at present. The far better timings will hopefully increase demand from all three cities on the route, so that a Saab 2000 can be based at SOU.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2011 14:56:12 GMT 1
We are taking this thread seriously off track now, and I'm happy for it to be moved, but if you leave Liverpool you have to sail around Anglesey, down St George's Channel, and around the SE coast of Ireland to reach open water. I believe this is about 250nm, so even at 30mph (26 knots to keep the calculations nautical), means ~10 hours sailing. That's a full shift on board and that's how the bean counters will calculate it. One piece of geography which can't be altered is the fact that the location of the Isle of Wight gives Southampton four tides a day - a useful bonus when you're trying to turn ships around quickly. I agree with tonyspeke that a proper cruise terminal at the Pierhead, with good connections, would improve matters, but the cruise options would still be limited. Leaving aside the politics of dock labour, one of the main reasons given by many shipping companies who pulled out of Liverpool in the late 60s/early 70s was that it was simply cheaper to operate to the ports in the south. I know this because I worked for a shipping company who moved! Now tell us Viscount, which port are you sailing from?  |
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Feb 7, 2011 15:15:35 GMT 1
Liverpool is better located for the majority of UK cruise passengers, as Tony pointed out, which is why the Port is after bigger terminal facilities than already exist.
Southampton has been hammering away at MPs to ensure we dont get them.
Wonder why?
|
|
|
|
Post by viscount on Feb 7, 2011 16:19:08 GMT 1
Garstonboy,
Not the one over half way along the English Channel hiding behind the Isle of White - something overlooked in your Maths.
..............While I overlooked my spelling, as pointed out in the next post!
|
|
|
|
Post by douglas12 on Feb 7, 2011 16:39:25 GMT 1
Brian, Do you mean the "Isle of Wight"  see me after class young man ;D ;D ;D Happy Spotting. Douglas12 (Norman). |
|
|
|
Post by Biggles on Feb 7, 2011 22:33:01 GMT 1
I can say that when my wife and I have done the cruises we have, the number of pax north of Watford exceeded those from the South. P&O chartered a Britannia aircraft (airline not4 prop) flying from MCR to San Juan along with a second charter from GTW. Then when US Imigration became obnoxious P&O moved to fly into Barbados, far nicer.
The reason Liverpool has been held back from developing a better cruise terminal was down to Liverpool Councillors caving in with the demands of Southamptons operators not wanting competition, that was a requirement for input of European cash for what we have now.
Time again to tell Europe to do one and also remind Southampton that Liverpool did big ships before they where born.
|
|
|
|
Post by LPL on Feb 8, 2011 10:43:30 GMT 1
Liverpool councillors have not caved in at all because the aim to get river terminal facilities in Liverpool is ongoing.
It is not down to councillors in Liverpool or Southampton, its not down to Southamptons operators either, its down to Parliament approving it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Biggles on Feb 8, 2011 17:43:01 GMT 1
Check the detail of the fnancial deal brokered for the money from Europe given to build the pretend cruise terminal we have now ? The money/euro funding WAS Given on the understanding that the cruise terminal would not be one in competition to SH in particular and another one, the name of which I can not recall. Liverpool Councillors did have a large part in agreeing this deal. Why would you say they didn`t ? The phrase "caved in" was meant to be used in connection with the process of putting the current berth in place and nothing to do with the latest attempts to get a proper Cruise Terminal in place, which is what has always been needed and not just a replacement floating ferry berth which is what we got, because a cruise terminal it is not.  |
|
