prosperegal
Senior Member
Porter has its VIPorter program, so they can build on that.
Toronto Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup
Porter has its VIPorter program, so they can build on that.
Kitsune
Senior Member
On the topic of Jets, I agree we wont see regional jets any time soon, but I think its only a matter of times before we see so called Very Light Jets, or VLJ's on the island. They only have room for one pilot and typically a max of 5-6 passengers. Some are even smaller then that, and the runway on the island is plenty long enough for them. Reason being is that they tend to cater more towards buisness because they are relatively cheap for a jet (only a million for some..)
EnviroTO
Senior Member
That is what I think. Things that are designed convenience first and other considerations afterwards usually lead to bad outcomes. When you design for scalability first and then try to maximize convenience within those frameworks second then you get sustainable solutions. The sustainable and most efficient solution is rarely the most convenient.
The most efficient solutions are always ones that require maximizing shared resources but that is never the most convenient because that shared resource will not be available at the second you want it... instead you need to wait for the resource to be ready.
Porter has 8 aircraft now and by the end of the year will have 18. They currently handle 500,000 passengers a year and the new terminal will handle over a million. Right away it is easy to do the math and see that if 8 aircraft which on some routes are nowhere near full, that 18 aircraft full will have a terminal designed for a million year pretty maxed out.
With 8 aircraft they have 3 heavily utilized gate positions. So with 18 aircraft will heavily utilize 7 gates. Based on this there is likely enough gate space because they could fit about 10 gates which would be more significantly more aircraft. They will be a little short for ground space though because one or two aircraft on ground hold will really mess things up.
Runway length and orientation is definitely a restriction. This evening all of Porter's inbound flights are headed to Pearson because with Pearson landing on the 33s Porter can't use the 08 ILS. Being right on the waterfront without an available crosswind runway and being located so close to Pearson's 33 approaches severely limits operations if the weather is bad. In addition, when an aircraft is full it can't be upscaled because the runway length can't handle it.
What this is all leading to is that while Porter will always be a profitable airline it will not be able to handle the demand. Porter is the equivalent of a newly built freeway in an urban environment. The freeway will always be utilized but will not maintain itself as the most convenient option without raising tolls or increasing infrastructure. In less than four years time I expect a bridge, connecting the airport to Stadium Rd, and runway extensions to be brought up because the airport will be maxed out and Bathurst will be a traffic jam.
kEiThZ
Superstar
VIPorter is no where as good a substitute for serious business travelers who like to get the status that works across the whole alliance. Aeroplan Elite gets your special treatment across Star Alliance. That being said the reward ratio is really good for VIPorter so they might end up drawing away AC clients who frequently travel Toronto-Ottawa,Toronto-Montreal or Toronto/Ottawa-Halifax.
A lot of VLJs still have balanced field lengths that are quite long for the island. Other than that issue, VLJs will never operate out of the island even if the restriction was lifted because of cost. Hangar/ramp space would be extremely expensive. Ditto for fuel delivery and landing fees. Most of the bigger companies who are based downtown and want bizjets probably want bigger ones anyway that would not fit on the island. Buying a single pilot bizjet that carries 5-6 people would not really be suitable for large companies (like the banks for example). And the smaller companies who would buy VLJs are likely to be equally price conscious on all those other costs which means that they would prefer Buttonville. Aside from that I still think its ridiculous to waste valuable slots at the Island on bizjets carring 5 executives.
kEiThZ
Superstar
There's a lot of factors you are glossing over. Porter is starting to get into longer flights which means that the frequency of flights will be less, but they will have higher loads. Longer flights also means that traffic will be more evenly distributed through the day. All this means that they are not going to be reaching crush load any time soon.
Given that they are doing well with 8 aircraft at 3 gates. That means 7-8 gates would be sufficient for the 20 aircraft they are buying, while they are building 10. I think they have planned prudently.
As for ramp space. I would assume that they will be bedding lots of aircraft in other places overnight. But I don't think that ramp space will be that big a problem. Air Ontario/Jazz used to have a bunch of Dash 8 on the ramp all the time and they managed fine. It's not like all 20 aircraft are going to be at the island at the same time.
First off the Q400 has amazing cross-wind characteristics. I don't think Porter maximizes them enough. I am surprised they didnt go to 26 in your example. Second, the ILS issue can be fixed. Landing lengths are a lot shorter than take-off runs. I'd like to see them upgrade 15/33 and install an ILS there. That would essentially remove a lot of the problems that Porter has.
A lot of this alarmist scenario fails to take into account the fact that Porter will never grow to be more than a regional airline. Even if Porter puts serious dents into the corridor route customers of Air Canada and Westjet, Porter will still max out at a million passengers. I don't think Porter can grow much beyond that because their business model is not designed for it. Instead, they will simply open a hub elsewhere and grow that way.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Thunder Bay is about as far as a Q400 from Toronto Island can fly. A single aircraft dedicated to that route would be back in Toronto approximately every 4h45 for 45 minutes (allows 3 cycles per day). If all 18 aircraft were dedicated to Thunder Bay and distributed evenly through the day that would be a landing or take-off every 9 minutes.
I agreed that they have enough gates planned.
Overnight ramp space will not be a problem because making sure they don't overnight in Toronto is merely a scheduling exercise. The issue is more one of having space to move aircraft around if flights are delayed. Air Ontario aircraft were less than half the size.
They would have a tail wind on 26 this evening.
The alarm is not about Porter. Porter is viable. The alarm is that Toronto City Centre Airport cannot meet the demands that will eventually be present. This will lead to ticket inavailability, higher ticket prices, and during delays or re-routes a scheduling and rebooking mess. Of course Porter can open a hub elsewhere and grow that way but that won't increase the capacity of Toronto City Centre Island. If you can't get a ticket on Porter at the price you want you will be forced to go to Pearson airport which is an inconvenience that some people believe is not something we should accept.
kEiThZ
Superstar
If your winds are 33 then 26 would be the logical runway. It's a 70 degree cross wind. That's steep but it depends on how windy it is and that's definitely not a tail wind. It's surprising they would divert for that. If the case is otherwise then they should have used 08. Meh, these things happen when you are flying....
Wait, so although you are against Porter and the island, you are worried about them being too successful? I really don't think they are going to max out any time soon. At a million passengers we are talking under 3000 pax a day. That's about 50 flights a day or one aircraft movement every 20 minutes or so. I doubt they'll be maxing out the potential of the Island any time soon. On the terminal side, processing 3000 pax a day is hardly cumbersome. That's about a bus load every 15 mins. I think they'll be fine.
sjc
Active Member
>>>Thunder Bay is about as far as a Q400 from Toronto Island can fly. A single aircraft dedicated to that route would be back in Toronto approximately every 4h45 for 45 minutes (allows 3 cycles per day). If all 18 aircraft were dedicated to Thunder Bay and distributed evenly through the day that would be a landing or take-off every 9 minutes.<<<
They can go to places farther than Thunder Bay if they stop somewhere on the way -- for example YTZ-YOW-YHZ. In such cases, it can be quite a while before the plane arrives back in Toronto.
They can go to places farther than Thunder Bay if they stop somewhere on the way -- for example YTZ-YOW-YHZ. In such cases, it can be quite a while before the plane arrives back in Toronto.
GrinTO
Active Member
New Terminal
Has anyone seen any images of the new terminal or building that are well under construction at City Centre Airport, Certainly a big structure going up there. Not sure why this is not in the construction forum.
Has anyone seen any images of the new terminal or building that are well under construction at City Centre Airport, Certainly a big structure going up there. Not sure why this is not in the construction forum.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
EnviroTO
Senior Member
I have nothing against Porter. Great service, great airline, great aircraft. I'm against an airport that is reducing the full potential of the waterfront and has no potential for greatness itself. Pearson does have a potential for greatness but if we siphon off traffic from it we reduce the critical mass that will allow other flights to exist. Atlanta wouldn't have all the routes it has today if there were two Atlanta airports because competition between airports would reduce the number of valid connections. The majority of primary airports in the world are further from the city centre than Pearson. Even the city airports are usually about 10km from city centre. Newark is 14km from Manhattan and Pearson is 18km from downtown.
I just don't see how anyone could argue that the airport is a "must have". All evidence shows that it fills a desire for convenience but satifies no need and provides little benefit to the city as a whole (but great benefit to Porter execs). If one looks at the world's cities there is no correlation to a city's success and the closeness of the city's airport to the city centre. If one looks at land values in cities around the world one will notice that the more expensive land is not at the airport where, if business (besides car rentals and hotels) in general found it important to locate near, it should be the most desirable land. If one looks at land values around the world and their proximity to key parks and waterfronts/riverfronts there is certainly a correlation.
The whole discussion is pointless really. Even if Porter and the airport was put up for sale the city couldn't afford to buy it. The chance to shut down the airport was back before the first flight took off. For now we need to sit back and watch as we approach the point where an aircraft lands every 15 minutes, the sound of a bee hive rings in the air, the breeze brings in the smell of Jet A, and the taxi and car horns on a congested Bathurst echo through the Harbourfront. Ahhhh, convenience is bliss.
Last edited:
EnviroTO
Senior Member
The majority are not taking the bus. The Porter counter in the SkyWalk was so unused they closed it.
jn_12
Senior Member
Keithz and Enviro are having a good conversation, but I'm just going to chime in with some info that might help.
First of all, with regards to room on the Island, new hangars will probably be built on the south side of the airport. This should give them enough storage capacity to have 10 planes on the ground, if they keep a few planes at their gates, which they do. The issue is, whether they will have 10 places to keep their planes in other cities? I'm assuming they're being given a second gate at YOW, and maybe YUL, but that won't happen at any of the American locations, so they would need 6 locations where they would keep a plane overnight that aren't YOW or YUL. That means they'll need to find some new regular routes in the next year because there isn't the demand for multiple daily year-round flights to Quebec City, Halifax, Tremblant, etc...
Second, the ILS on the Island was recently updated around the New Year. This has made for a better situation than before, but at this time of year when fog is a big issue, you often get ceilings lower than 200 feet, and they aren't allowed to land at that threshold. With regards to using the second runway, they have never done this.
Third, Most of the people traveling on the YTZ-YHZ route via YOW, aren't the same demographic as those going to YOW or YUL. It's a lot of students and families who are just looking for the cheapest way to get there. So any route that involves a stopover somewhere (other than Tremblant which usually has a stopover in YUL) probably doesn't involve (m)any business travellers. So, let's say one day they felt Winnipeg would be a good destination with a stop in Thunder Bay along the way, it would probably consist of a different market that we don't normally associate with Porter, but has been growing steadily with these unplanned routes (Halifax was never in the business plan).
Fourth, I've seen images of the building (though this was last summer, and I don't remember significant details) and the floor plan/layout. It will be two floors, one for arrivals and one for departures. 5 new gates will be built as currently there are 5 gates, and these old ones will be recycled into the new structure, but improved to be include bridges.
Any questions or clarifications, just ask.
First of all, with regards to room on the Island, new hangars will probably be built on the south side of the airport. This should give them enough storage capacity to have 10 planes on the ground, if they keep a few planes at their gates, which they do. The issue is, whether they will have 10 places to keep their planes in other cities? I'm assuming they're being given a second gate at YOW, and maybe YUL, but that won't happen at any of the American locations, so they would need 6 locations where they would keep a plane overnight that aren't YOW or YUL. That means they'll need to find some new regular routes in the next year because there isn't the demand for multiple daily year-round flights to Quebec City, Halifax, Tremblant, etc...
Second, the ILS on the Island was recently updated around the New Year. This has made for a better situation than before, but at this time of year when fog is a big issue, you often get ceilings lower than 200 feet, and they aren't allowed to land at that threshold. With regards to using the second runway, they have never done this.
Third, Most of the people traveling on the YTZ-YHZ route via YOW, aren't the same demographic as those going to YOW or YUL. It's a lot of students and families who are just looking for the cheapest way to get there. So any route that involves a stopover somewhere (other than Tremblant which usually has a stopover in YUL) probably doesn't involve (m)any business travellers. So, let's say one day they felt Winnipeg would be a good destination with a stop in Thunder Bay along the way, it would probably consist of a different market that we don't normally associate with Porter, but has been growing steadily with these unplanned routes (Halifax was never in the business plan).
Fourth, I've seen images of the building (though this was last summer, and I don't remember significant details) and the floor plan/layout. It will be two floors, one for arrivals and one for departures. 5 new gates will be built as currently there are 5 gates, and these old ones will be recycled into the new structure, but improved to be include bridges.
Any questions or clarifications, just ask.
jn_12
Senior Member
Manning that booth was an awesome way to waste a day though. Bring your own laptop and essentially talk to 10 people per day, most of which just want to know how to get to the Gotrain or the ACC. Really easy way to make a paycheque.
sjc
Active Member
>>>So, let's say one day they felt Winnipeg would be a good destination with a stop in Thunder Bay along the way, it would probably consist of a different market that we don't normally associate with Porter,<<<
A half hour stop simply cancels out the extra half hour it takes to get to Pearson. If you are flying to Saskatoon, for example, right now most of the flights on Westjet or Air Canada connect through Winnipeg or Calgary. Air Canada has 4 Embraer non-stops, but the price on those can be significantly higher if it is a busy day.
Having flown Porter from Halifax to Toronto, it is a lot more convenient to check in at Porter than Air Canada in Halifax as the lines are much much shorter. I just sat on the plane for a half hour or so while they refueled in Ottawa.
Last time I went to Saskatoon it was on an RJ and I much prefer Q400s to RJs. I'd take Porter if I could over a non-stop RJ. I haven't been on an Embraer so I can't really compare those.
Many business people do consider the price of the ticket if their schedule allows for it. A lot of budgets these days are tight.
If the price is the same, I have to consider how much of a hurry I am in vs. how much I really don't like going out to Pearson.
EDIT: Thunder Bay to Edmonton Downtown Airport might be an interesting route, although I don't think they would be allowed in to Edmonton unless they got the rules changed.
A half hour stop simply cancels out the extra half hour it takes to get to Pearson. If you are flying to Saskatoon, for example, right now most of the flights on Westjet or Air Canada connect through Winnipeg or Calgary. Air Canada has 4 Embraer non-stops, but the price on those can be significantly higher if it is a busy day.
Having flown Porter from Halifax to Toronto, it is a lot more convenient to check in at Porter than Air Canada in Halifax as the lines are much much shorter. I just sat on the plane for a half hour or so while they refueled in Ottawa.
Last time I went to Saskatoon it was on an RJ and I much prefer Q400s to RJs. I'd take Porter if I could over a non-stop RJ. I haven't been on an Embraer so I can't really compare those.
Many business people do consider the price of the ticket if their schedule allows for it. A lot of budgets these days are tight.
If the price is the same, I have to consider how much of a hurry I am in vs. how much I really don't like going out to Pearson.
EDIT: Thunder Bay to Edmonton Downtown Airport might be an interesting route, although I don't think they would be allowed in to Edmonton unless they got the rules changed.
Last edited: