News   Nov 08, 2024
 92     0 
News   Nov 08, 2024
 545     1 
News   Nov 08, 2024
 396     0 

Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)

If that is the case, label it as a fantasy.
I think there is a difference between a fantasy therd and one that is about something that could actually happen or had some actual plans. Like for example the discussion about the Downtown relief line which turned into the Ontario line, I'm sure their are some people who think that because the downtown relief line was planned for so long it should be a fantasy thread as well.
 
I think there is a difference between a fantasy therd and one that is about something that could actually happen or had some actual plans. Like for example the discussion about the Downtown relief line which turned into the Ontario line, I'm sure their are some people who think that because the downtown relief line was planned for so long it should be a fantasy thread as well.

So, this will get built one day?
 
So, this will get built one day?
Considering that the federal government still owns the land for it I think it could be at some point but like I said I think this thread should be closed for now until their is something official and not just someone click baiting their own website with no actual source of information.
 
Considering that the federal government still owns the land for it I think it could be at some point but like I said I think this thread should be closed for now until their is something official and not just someone click baiting their own website with no actual source of information.

Which is even better for us as we simply call him out. Let us keep poking holes in his website.
 
So, this will get built one day?

There is a genuine need for a general aviation airport to replace Buttonville. CF taking full ownership after failing to sell it puts a time limit on operations there; maybe another decade?

If Porter relocates or goes bankrupt then I can also see a 2035 where the Island Airport is reduced to a heli-port only. There's ~$1B in land value (via MZO) that the province would love to extract and the tripartite renewal happens to align with Waterfront Toronto wrapping up their portions of the Portlands redevelopment.

So yeah, by 2040 there will probably be a small Pickering airport with a flight school, charter, and personal jet service. Oshawa airport, Buttonville, Downsview, and Toronto Island all being redeveloped. If it doesn't get built, one of Greenbank or Markham or Stouffville airports will get an expansion to basically the same thing.
 
Last edited:
There is a genuine need for a general aviation airport to replace Buttonville. CF taking full ownership after failing to sell it puts a time limit on operations there; maybe another decade?

If Porter relocates or goes bankrupt then I can also see a 2035 where the Island Airport is reduced to a heli-port only. There's ~$1B in land value (via MZO) that the province would love to extract and the tripartite renewal happens to align with Waterfront Toronto wrapping up their portions of the Portlands redevelopment.

So yeah, by 2040 there will probably be a small Pickering airport with a flight school, charter, and personal jet service. Oshawa airport, Buttonville, Downsview, and Toronto Island all being redeveloped. If it doesn't get built, one of Greenbank or Markham or Stouffville airports will get an expansion to basically the same thing.

Why not consolidate that all at the Peterborough airport?
 
Why not consolidate that all at the Peterborough airport?

Distance mostly. The added 3 hour round-trip makes an afternoon meeting downtown challenging if arriving by private jet. Same reason they don't really use Hamilton much. Pearson has congestion issues during peak periods.
 
The SAF discussion is an important one to have, although difficult on this forum do to the political background noise and trolling. Unfortunately a common problem for anyone pointing out the advantages of aviation.

If you want to discuss SAF and it's impact on the aviation industry than maybe you should, you know, start a thread on that topic rather than promote it (SAF) as a justification for an airport.

You know kind of like how other's on this forum might promote battery trains, or hydrogen trains (though not without their own religious fervor), can do so by talking only about the technology and don't, for example, use it as a reason to justify oh I don't know a proposed rail station such as the Pearson Transit Hub. You know why? Because the technology used to get the trains to the station is irrelevant to the justification of/for the station.

Make sense?

I would like to highlight its relevance to Pickering Airport. The number of flights is expected to double in the next several decades. A worldwide trend, even in Europe It is projected to increase by at least 50%. Local accessible aviation capacity is important to make these flights as efficient as possible. Efficiency is not just landing slots, it is ground support buildings, taxiways etc. The more efficient our aviation infrastructure, the less fuel burned.

these flights need to be carbon neutral, and although electric flight is on its way, the majority of aircraft flights between now and 2050 will utilize jet fuel. SAF is a drop in replacement fuel able to reduce emissions , potentially to net zero depending on how the SAF is produce.

There is no relevance to Pickering. Flights will increase, yes. There is a desire to reduce emissions from planes, yes. These will occur with or without Pickering. There is arguably capacity at Pearson, Hamilton, etc to absorb at least some of those flights. SAF will not be a competitive advantage for Pickering, ..., because if SAF goes mainstream it will be available at ALL airports.


Canada used 7 billion litres of Jet A in 2019
the US produced 9 billion litres of bio diese fuel of all types in 2019.
Canada, although it has the potential to out produce the US in BioDiesel, produced less than 400 million lites in 2019 and almost none of that was utilized as SAF.

We need to do better, starting with a recognition of the importance of local production of SAF.
right now our efforts are inhibited but a misapplied carbon tax on SAF, politics of the far left that want to shut down aviation due to its role in the global economy.

Again irrelevant to Pickering. If you want to promote the development of a Biodesel/SAF fuel manufacturing industry in Canada, than that is what you should be promoting.

Is SAF even commercially available in such a way that it's sale is taxed (and particularly carbon taxed)? Also ah the mask comes of "politics of the far left" good one

Some of the provinces get it, for instance


What is needed now is federal leadership with production incentives and for the industry to switch over to SAF.
Please create a thread promoting SAF instead of posting in a thread that is trying to, and twisting the technology into a reason for building Pickering
 
There is a genuine need for a general aviation airport to replace Buttonville. CF taking full ownership after failing to sell it puts a time limit on operations there; maybe another decade?

If Porter relocates or goes bankrupt then I can also see a 2035 where the Island Airport is reduced to a heli-port only. There's ~$1B in land value (via MZO) that the province would love to extract and the tripartite renewal happens to align with Waterfront Toronto wrapping up their portions of the Portlands redevelopment.

So yeah, by 2040 there will probably be a small Pickering airport with a flight school, charter, and personal jet service. Oshawa airport, Buttonville, Downsview, and Toronto Island all being redeveloped. If it doesn't get built, one of Greenbank or Markham or Stouffville airports will get an expansion to basically the same thing.

Some more background on Buttonvilles future and what the timeframe is:


While it is possible that CF paid 2 million an acre to rebuild the airport into a london city style arrangement, it is unlikely. Buttonville will close, the question is when. The earliest is end of 2022 but most likely at least a year or two further down the road When CF is ready. After all Buttonville is profitable so there is no rush. They can wait for the right opportunity.

btw markham airport evicted all it aircraft tenants this summer, the Thomson company owns it. Possiblely in preparation for an attempt to break the PASZR with a housing proposal, but who knows? They are a wild card. .
 
1 What does this have to do with Pickering
2 how does this affect Pickering s ability to attract a) a domestic canadian airline abd b) sufficient international airlines such that the airport can be successful
3 what makes Pickering unique in that it will benefit from this scenario while it's competition (yyz and ytz) will not (or will benefit less)?
 
1 What does this have to do with Pickering
2 how does this affect Pickering s ability to attract a) a domestic canadian airline abd b) sufficient international airlines such that the airport can be successful
3 what makes Pickering unique in that it will benefit from this scenario while it's competition (yyz and ytz) will not (or will benefit less)?
Thank-you for your questions, as they provide some interesting insights to the disconnect in this discussion.

Perhaps caused by the relentless trolling from the anti-capitalist crowd on this forum,


in order:

  1. Pickering is purposed as a utility airport ( see ASA report). On the low end, this is similar traffic to what is now being handled at Buttonville, on the high end these are the operators being squeezed out of Pearson by high costs and lack of ground space.
  2. While your average consumer only sees aviation from an big airline point of view , the majority of flights in Canada are not related to the large airlines. But specially airlines ( Fly GTA for example) does operate out of Buttonville today, so pickering is expected to continue and have the ground space to expand. ( disclosure- Some of my freelance gigs have involved flying for, or doing flight training for these operators)
  3. Pearson and City center have foot print /space constraints and have selectively blocked utility operators with high prices as they are not seen as maximizing scarce resource utilization compared to the airlines. Buttonville has always been the overflow. This is the reason it has a waiting list of aircraft looking for hangar space and the reason why it is a profitable private airport. Why pay $1100 to land and park at signature for an hour at yyz when you can land and park at Buttonville for a $100, offload and load with ease?
 

Back
Top