Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)

[MarkBrooks]

I understand that you guys no zip about aviation, but at least look at a map.

Waterloo is two hours away, its like driving to Palm Springs from LA. and it’s runways would have to be rebuilt and lengthed to take wide body jets, a massive undertaking , it also has the same fuel problem as Hamilton. No rail or pipeline into Hamilton limits is ability to help. No go juice , no go. Hamilton is also in the far corner of the GTA, two hours away from pickering.

the tyranny of geography always wins.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Everyone, while I don't have the same enthusiasm as Mark does for Pickering. Just look at the distances of those airports from the main airport:

LA:
- BUR 29 KM
- LGB 27 KM
- SNA 48 KM
- ONT 54 KM

TOR:
- HAM 61 KM
- YTZ 19 KM

Nothing else is within 60 Km of YYZ. LA is not an example for anti airport expansion in toronto..

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

LA vs Toronto airports - Google My Maps

LA vs Toronto airports

drive.google.com

Now, let's here an argument for more airports.

Downsview, Oshawa, and Buttonville don't have any scheduled air services. Buttonville has been set to be shut down for years and Downsview is only used by Bombardier. Why would you include 3 airports that do not have passenger service?

 

[micheal_can]

Downsview, Oshawa, and Buttonville don't have any scheduled air services. Buttonville has been set to be shut down for years and Downsview is only used by Bombardier. Why would you include 3 airports that do not have passenger service?

Because Mark want to ignore airports that could be expanded. I did add them as a tongue in cheek sort of way. I know their future and present.

 

[kEiThZ]

Nothing else is within 60 Km of YYZ.

Why do people always forget about Billy Bishop? Also, if we're talking back up airports in an emergency, than 60 km away is just fine. After all, nobody is suggesting that it's the norm. The entire concept is moronic. How many cities build multi-billion dollar airport for "just in case"?

 

[micheal_can]

Why do people always forget about Billy Bishop? Also, if we're talking back up airports in an emergency, than 60 km away is just fine. After all, nobody is suggesting that it's the norm. The entire concept is moronic. How many cities build multi-billion dollar airport for "just in case"?

An even more unique thing is people are always talking about the size of the runways.

So, let's see who can tell me what the second largest runway in Canada is. Hint, Pearson is the largest.

 

[rbt]

...
Nothing else is within 60 Km of YYZ. LA is not an example for anti airport expansion in toronto..

As with the daily commute, distance doesn't matter, it's the time component that people really consider. Ignore 60km, and instead go with 1 hour trip time to the airport; and even then the time consideration by customers largely depends on whether the flight is domestic or intercontinental. A 4 hour drive after a 24 hour flight to NZ may seem perfectly reasonable where a 2 hour drive after a 45 minute flight (from Ottawa) is going to be pretty frustrating.

A strong GO program could make Waterloo relevant for budget conscious domestic travellers and ever increasing LA highway congestion reduces the coverage of LA airports every year.

I've paid extra to land at Ontario Airport because it was walking distance to Rancho Cucamonga where LAX was going to add enough travel time that it wasn't really an option at all.

 

[micheal_can]

As with the daily commute, distance doesn't matter, it's the time component that people really consider. Ignore 60km, and instead go with 1 hour trip time to the airport; and even then the time consideration by customers largely depends on whether the flight is domestic or intercontinental.

A strong GO program could make Waterloo relevant for budget conscious domestic travellers and ever increasing LA highway congestion reduces the coverage of LA airports every year.

I've paid extra to land at Ontario Airport because it was walking distance to Rancho Cucamonga where LAX was going to add enough travel time that it wasn't really an option at all.

And both Hamilton's and Waterloo's are close to existing corridors.

We keep trying to reinvent the transportation world. Why not go after the low hanging fruit. Build up existing infrastructure. You could likely build up both airports to YYZ capabilities than it would cost to build a new one in the middle of nowhere.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Why do people always forget about Billy Bishop? Also, if we're talking back up airports in an emergency, than 60 km away is just fine. After all, nobody is suggesting that it's the norm. The entire concept is moronic. How many cities build multi-billion dollar airport for "just in case"?

I didnt forget about the island. Ytz is the island airport. And i didn't come up with the 60 km metric out of thin air either, that was the furthest airport from LAX in Micheal's google map (ontario).

Yes travel time plays as much of a role in how convenient people will see an airport as if not more.

I was simply countering micheals post which was trying ti give the impression that the GTA has more regional airports that the LA area does, and no matter how you measure it its not true

 

[micheal_can]

I didnt forget about the island. Ytz is the island airport. And i didn't come up with the 60 km metric out of thin air either, that was the furthest airport from LAX in Micheal's google map (ontario).

Yes travel time plays as much of a role in how convenient people will see an airport as if not more.

I was simply countering micheals post which was trying ti give the impression that the GTA has more regional airports that the LA area does, and no matter how you measure it its not true

What I will always argue is that until we have existing airports properly utilized, there is no sense in spending billions of taxpayer's dollars on a new airport. Whether we argue distance or infrastructure, or anything else, we have airports that can easily take more flights, and should be built out to do so.

 

[Tim MacDonald]

An even more unique thing is people are always talking about the size of the runways.

So, let's see who can tell me what the second largest runway in Canada is. Hint, Pearson is the largest.

Going strictly by memory I thought Mirabel had the largest at 200x12,000ft which beats Pearson.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Going strictly by memory I thought Mirabel had the largest at 200x12,000ft which beats Pearson.

Calgary has the longest runway at 4267 m, 05/23 is the longest runway at YYZ and is 3,389 m

 

[pw20]

the tyranny of geography always wins.

This is the most ridiculous quote that you repeatedly use. You refuse to concede that there are 3x (maybe 4x?) as many people west of Yonge as there are east of Yonge Street. Waterloo may be like driving to Palm Springs from Oshawa but it's not for the millions of people who live in the Western GTA and or more densely populated Niagara /Hamilton region. If there IS demand for a second international airport, there are existing airports (Waterloo, Hamilton) that are closer to population demand. (FWIW both myself and others have added up population numbers in this thread).

 

[Tim MacDonald]

Interesting about Calgary. I remember when YYZ expanded 5/23 to 11,500ft in the late 90s. Even with the altitude at YYC, I can't imagine anything would ever need 14k feet to get off the ground.

 

[kEiThZ]

This is the most ridiculous quote that you repeatedly use. You refuse to concede that there are 3x (maybe 4x?) as many people west of Yonge as there are east of Yonge Street. Waterloo may be like driving to Palm Springs from Oshawa but it's not for the millions of people who live in the Western GTA and or more densely populated Niagara /Hamilton region. If there IS demand for a second international airport, there are existing airports (Waterloo, Hamilton) that are closer to population demand. (FWIW both myself and others have added up population numbers in this thread).

By using a large radius around Pickering and capturing most of the 416, he can claim to have a large catchment. Pickering is effectively there to make the 416 have extraordinary amount of service while doing jack all for the bulk of residents who live West of Yonge. Mark cares about the return on his sweat equity here than what's sensible policy though. Why else is an aging Boomer pilot trolling an urbanist forum?