Mississauga Pearson Transit Hub | ?m | ?s | GTAA

Amare said:
Terminal 1 at Pearson is one of the more impressive terminals in North America there's no doubt about that, while Montreal on the other hand did a pretty good job with the US Departures wing. With regards to the rest, I agree needs it needs an update.

However in terms of future plans, Montreal by far has a more ambitious plan for their terminal areas and gates than Toronto has and that's the point I was trying to hammer home. The terminals (both 1 and 3) at Pearson are practically at capacity at certain periods of the day, and their current plan does virtually nothing to address the issue. The future extensions to Terminal 1 will make the current Terminal 3 look stunning, and that's really saying something.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean by the latter.

We have essentially confirmation that Pier H is coming in the near term (likely construction a year or two from now). We have no idea what this pier is going to look like. The current planned layout seems to suggest they're following the original 2007 masterplan for Pier H, which means an extension of the central processor and a new pier. Again, we don't know the design of it, but I doubt it will be a barn.

Secondly, you seem to assume because Pier G has been temporarily scuttled (pushed back to mid/long term plan), and a temporary barn built in its place, that this is the new direction of YYZ. I highly doubt that. Gate 193 extension is clearly temporary, and the GTAA says so in their plan.

What Montreal is currently planning to build by 2030 is just the end of that new pier (so it will be a remote terminal for a while like our infield) and the new garage including the REM station. Let's just say I'm not too concerned about an airport handling less than half of YYZ's numbers catching up in architecture or passengers anytime soon.
 
From link.

MaltonAirport1937Small.jpg

Malton Airport (1937)

Guess the original wasn't good enough for today's planes.
 
The bigger question in my eyes is how preclearance will work out once Piers H and G are built, and as a result, where international flights will be The Current Pier F is inadequate for most international planes (with the exception of the 767) along the current preclearance zone. More large gates are needed to accommodate widebody aircraft (particularly the 777, 787 and A350), and no plans seem to be advocating for any of these types of gates to be built.
 
Streety McCarface said:
The bigger question in my eyes is how preclearance will work out once Piers H and G are built, and as a result, where international flights will be The Current Pier F is inadequate for most international planes (with the exception of the 767) along the current preclearance zone. More large gates are needed to accommodate widebody aircraft (particularly the 777, 787 and A350), and no plans seem to be advocating for any of these types of gates to be built.
Click to expand...

Pier F and specifically hammerhead F WERE designed to handle large international flights. Hammerhead F has the only two gates at T1 that are able to accomodate the a380. The issue is that the rest of the pier is operated as swing gates which can take domestic, or international and us transborder, or international flights. Usa flights often take up much of the arm of pier f taking capacity away from international flights. This is why a new pier g is needed to move all usa flights there, freeing up pier f for international expansion
 
So why do all of the armchair quarterbacks here know this and the people who run the GTAA not? Where on earth is Air Canada going to gate its 2019 international expansion?

Ugh. A bus ride away. Who can say IFT?
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
Pier F and specifically hammerhead F WERE designed to handle large international flights. Hammerhead F has the only two gates at T1 that are able to accomodate the a380. The issue is that the rest of the pier is operated as swing gates which can take domestic, or international and us transborder, or international flights. Usa flights often take up much of the arm of pier f taking capacity away from international flights. This is why a new pier g is needed to move all usa flights there, freeing up pier f for international expansion
Click to expand...

I know, but the part of Pier F that is currently used by transborder gates is unable to accommodate anything larger than a 767. I guess my real question is how will the international gates be spread out if only Hammerhead F can take large widebody aircraft, and if Piers G and H are built with hammerheads, how will people connect to those international gates?
 
Streety McCarface said:
I know, but the part of Pier F that is currently used by transborder gates is unable to accommodate anything larger than a 767. I guess my real question is how will the international gates be spread out if only Hammerhead F can take large widebody aircraft, and if Piers G and H are built with hammerheads, how will people connect to those international gates?
Click to expand...
We’ll be back at the IFT. It has gates for large wide bodies. Gotta love that bus ride to your gate.
 
Streety McCarface said:
I know, but the part of Pier F that is currently used by transborder gates is unable to accommodate anything larger than a 767. I guess my real question is how will the international gates be spread out if only Hammerhead F can take large widebody aircraft, and if Piers G and H are built with hammerheads, how will people connect to those international gates?
Click to expand...

The 767 and 787 are not that different in size. Wing span is wider which is a concern, but after all the 787 was designed in some part as a 767 replacement
 
IFT is being reactivated this summer for non-hubbed airlines. That is likely Sunwing and Air Transat as they primarily operate O&D flights and not transfers like AC or Westjet.

Pier H is going to take on the role of Pier G (transborder pier). Pier G is being pushed back, Pier H is being pushed forward. This is a distinction some members here need to make.

Additionally, the GTAA is looking at remote stands for certain flights, which is how the vast majority of global hubs operate. No need to have a CRJ taking up valuable gate space when you can park it somewhere and bus the passengers into the terminal.
 
Filip said:
IFT is being reactivated this summer for non-hubbed airlines. That is likely Sunwing and Air Transat as they primarily operate O&D flights and not transfers like AC or Westjet.

Pier H is going to take on the role of Pier G (transborder pier). Pier G is being pushed back, Pier H is being pushed forward. This is a distinction some members here need to make.

Additionally, the GTAA is looking at remote stands for certain flights, which is how the vast majority of global hubs operate. No need to have a CRJ taking up valuable gate space when you can park it somewhere and bus the passengers into the terminal.
Click to expand...

Sunwing and air transat already operate out of T3. How will that relieve congestion at T1? Unless GTAA starts shifting airlines from T1 to T3 (something i dont think they want to do).

Can you provide a link where gtaa announced the re opening of the IFT? and the shift in priority from pier G to H? I dont mean to call you out on these statements but i honestly have never heard about this until you posted it, and i consider myself pretty tuned into what'@ going on at YYZ.
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
Sunwing and air transat already operate out of T3. How will that relieve congestion at T1? Unless GTAA starts shifting airlines from T1 to T3 (something i dont think they want to do).

Can you provide a link where gtaa announced the re opening of the IFT? and the shift in priority from pier G to H? I dont mean to call you out on these statements but i honestly have never heard about this until you posted it, and i consider myself pretty tuned into what'@ going on at YYZ.
Click to expand...
It's all in the recent Masterplan.

Pier G is noted as long term, Pier H near to medium term (they've swapped the two, hence why I don't understand the bemoaning about G, we're getting an even bigger pier!)

The Masterplan included a blurb about positioning charter airlines to the IFT to clear up gate space. Charter in this case likely means Sunwing and Transat. The near to medium term plan looks at using T3 and T1 as one big terminal. This is partially why the connection between the two is being built. It will allow a lot more flexibility for AC and WS.
 
Filip said:
It's all in the recent Masterplan.

Pier G is noted as long term, Pier H near to medium term (they've swapped the two, hence why I don't understand the bemoaning about G, we're getting an even bigger pier!)

The Masterplan included a blurb about positioning charter airlines to the IFT to clear up gate space. Charter in this case likely means Sunwing and Transat. The near to medium term plan looks at using T3 and T1 as one big terminal. This is partially why the connection between the two is being built. It will allow a lot more flexibility for AC and WS.
Click to expand...

Pier H can't operate large widebody aircraft, and relief is needed for large widebody aircraft (we have 4 777-300ERs going to London Heathrow alone daily),

More importantly, the neck of Pier F can't operate large widebody aircraft. How are they going to relocate transborder flights to pier H when that does nothing to relieve E gates (unless they are planning on using the neck for Domestic flights, but even then that doesn't make sense since Piers D and E have plenty of space)?

Also, how are they going to move the preclearance facility to Pier H without sacrificing bag drop locations? Will you have swing gates between Piers F and H for International Flights? Even then that doesn't make sense because moving walkways only go in one direction, and that's at least a 20-minute walk between E gates and new F gates for International Flights.

Someone hasn't thought this through.
 
Streety McCarface said:
Pier H can't operate large widebody aircraft, and relief is needed for large widebody aircraft (we have 4 777-300ERs going to London Heathrow alone daily),

More importantly, the neck of Pier F can't operate large widebody aircraft. How are they going to relocate transborder flights to pier H when that does nothing to relieve E gates (unless they are planning on using the neck for Domestic flights, but even then that doesn't make sense since Piers D and E have plenty of space)?

Also, how are they going to move the preclearance facility to Pier H without sacrificing bag drop locations? Will you have swing gates between Piers F and H for International Flights? Even then that doesn't make sense because moving walkways only go in one direction, and that's at least a 20-minute walk between E gates and new F gates for International Flights.

Someone hasn't thought this through.
Click to expand...
Pier G wasn't going to serve widebody aircraft either...

I think the plan (was/is?) to make Pier F a fully international pier and rejig the gates (space them out, whatever required) to get widebodies down the pier.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top