Toronto Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup

It would be much better if they would simply have regulations regarding the amount of noise permitted - time of day, level, location etc. Regulations that are specific to a technology are going to become out-of-date pretty quickly.
 
jamincan said:
It would be much better if they would simply have regulations regarding the amount of noise permitted - time of day, level, location etc. Regulations that are specific to a technology are going to become out-of-date pretty quickly.
Click to expand...

There specific sound limits as well limits to the aircraft allowed. One of the solutions to increasing the number of slots is to build a sound supression wall.
 
Not to knickpick, but the Pratt & Whitney Canada PW100 engines on the Q400 are jet engines. They just used the jet turbine to turn a prop instead of creating exhaust thrust. Beyond that, both turboprops and turbofans are jet engines with compressors, turbines and combustion chambers.
Click to expand...

The Tripartite Agreement which governs the operation of the airport ( http://communityair.org/briefing/docs/briefing8-tripartite.pdf ) specifically allows turboprop engines:

"jet-powered aircraft" means any aircraft which on landing or takeoff is powered
by one or more, turbo-jet, fan jet or any other type of jet engine. For greater
certainty an aircraft powered by turbo prop engines shall not be deemed to be a
jet-powered aircraft.
Click to expand...

The agreement also specifically allows the operation of "De Havilland Dash-8 Aircraft".

Just supposing they did allow the operation of jet aircraft, what jets are available that can operate legally on a 4000' runway?
 
Last edited:
A318, A319 with less than max takeoff weight, all the BAE RJ series, and the 146s. Bombardier CRJ-200 is likely with weight restrictions. Fokker F-70 as well.
 
Last edited:
A318s operate to/from LCY but there's >5000ft there. Can't see an A319 getting out with 4000.
 
dowlingm said:
A318s operate to/from LCY but there's >5000ft there. Can't see an A319 getting out with 4000.
Click to expand...
Also, the A318s at LCY have only 32 seats and are still weight restricted (they stop in Ireland to refuel on the way to JFK, but can make the return journey nonstop)

I have read that Alaska Airlines used to fly 737-200 Combis into Dutch Harbor (DUT) which is 4100 feet.
 
dowlingm said:
A318s operate to/from LCY but there's >5000ft there. Can't see an A319 getting out with 4000.
Click to expand...

Flying west bound you have shorter range than east bound, plus there is the steep approach to consider.

For the island airport if their were fewer restrictions the important change would be the number of passengers you can get out while staying within noise contours. I doubt it would be worth it to use noise room for medium range flights.
 
rdaner said:
What is happening with the TPA's plan to fill in the harbour adjacent to the runway?
Click to expand...

I believe the provincial environmental assessment is underway. The recent "hug-a-polluter" changes to the federal environment legislation did away with the need for a federal EA for the project (along with something like 5000 other projects).
 
I can haz codeshare with EI at BOS plz?

Would probably be the fastest way to get to Ireland in the off season once Transat shut down rather than enduring LHR T1 hell. Does mean TSA etc etc though.
 
k10ery said:
^What provincial EA? First I've heard of it.
Click to expand...

Good point, detective. I naively assumed that in the absence of a federal EA, there would at least be a provincial EA, but I can find no record of it. I also note that the EA screening report indicated that the lake-filling would be done in the dead of night when no one is watching.

Oh well, I guess those two decades of actual environmental regulation were fun while they lasted. But at least I can be sure that a return to the dark, filth-spewing days of yore will yield widespread economic growth for our society.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top