Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)

[denfromoakvillemilton]

@kEiThZ @MarkBrooks given what has happened with GM in Oshawa, the government's hand might be forced here and they might have to build this thing as a major international airport to provide jobs.

 

[gweed123]

Toronto and the GTA could be enough of a draw for the business person. Would that be enough though?

Business people would be more likely to use the Island for quick access to downtown. Business travellers aren't generally as price-conscious as vacationers, since a lot of the time it's a business expense.

We already have one of these: at the Island. And thanks to runway length and aircraft restriction, it's effectively perimeter restricted, like LGA or DCA. And YTZ is even better positioned than DCA or LGA. So the question becomes, what additional traffic would be gained by having another secondary airport (or a replacement for YTZ).

Because the Island is limited, flights to places like Florida, Vegas, or California are largely off the table. And locations like that happen to have a large demand from price-conscious travellers. That's where the market is, IMO. Many people from across the GTHA would be willing to drive to Pickering or Hamilton to save $100 each on their flight.

 

[kEiThZ]

Because the Island is limited, flights to places like Florida, Vegas, or California are largely off the table. And locations like that happen to have a large demand from price-conscious travellers. That's where the market is, IMO. Many people from across the GTHA would be willing to drive to Pickering or Hamilton to save $100 each on their flight.

That doesn’t help the region though. You’re just actively facilitating the departure of tourist dollars with little in return. That’s very different from secondary airports like LGW, DCA, LGA and MDW which still bring in decent business traffic.

 

[kEiThZ]

@kEiThZ @MarkBrooks given what has happened with GM in Oshawa, the government's hand might be forced here and they might have to build this thing as a major international airport to provide jobs.

How do they replace jobs lost next year with jobs nearly a decade from now? And that’s aside from skill sets being different.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

How do they replace jobs lost next year with jobs nearly a decade from now? And that’s aside from skill sets being different.

They might have to accelerate this imo

 

[kEiThZ]

They might have to accelerate this imo

How?

This thing doesn't have serious investors. It doesn't have a detailed design. It doesn't have an EA. Etc.

Even the absolute best case scenario might be something like 5 years. And that would be record time for something like this. With lots of waivers. And risk acceptance by an unprecedented list of authorities.

 

[gweed123]

That doesn’t help the region though. You’re just actively facilitating the departure of tourist dollars with little in return. That’s very different from secondary airports like LGW, DCA, LGA and MDW which still bring in decent business traffic.

But those tourists are still going to go to Florida or Vegas or wherever. Another airport to fly out of just gives them the option to find a cheaper flight.

 

[lenaitch]

How?

This thing doesn't have serious investors. It doesn't have a detailed design. It doesn't have an EA. Etc.

Even the absolute best case scenario might be something like 5 years. And that would be record time for something like this. With lots of waivers. And risk acceptance by an unprecedented list of authorities.

Plus the public infrastructure related to it. Even a basic road access would probably take that long. As for rail-based, it would require solutions involving the CP North Toronto sub, rehabilitation of the Don Branch (if access to downtown) and routing around the Agincourt Yard, none of which I don't think is all that far along. Sanitary access to the York-Durham Big Pipe? Capacity? Plus funding - there's a lot of hands in the wish list cookie jar.

 

[nfitz]

As for rail-based, it would require solutions involving the CP North Toronto sub, rehabilitation of the Don Branch (if access to downtown) and routing around the Agincourt Yard, none of which I don't think is all that far along.

Other than protecting corridors into the airport, I'd think there's little there to be done for decades. You'd need significant passenger numbers before you start running direct service into the airport.

I'd assume that for the first few years of operation, it would be cargo and general aviation. And then if demand is sufficient, you start running passenger services.

Look at Mirabel - they protected the passenger corridor into that airport, and even roughed in a station into the now-demolished passenger terminal. But they never came close to the number of passengers required to justify building the rail.

There's lots of thing that would and could hold up Pickering proceeding. Rail isn't one of them.

 

[lenaitch]

.
There's lots of thing that would and could hold up Pickering proceeding. Rail isn't one of them.

Totally agree. I was commenting on the timeline being promoted for a passenger airport.

 

[MarkBrooks]

@kEiThZ @MarkBrooks given what has happened with GM in Oshawa, the government's hand might be forced here and they might have to build this thing as a major international airport to provide jobs.

Totally on the money, and on that point:

https://pickeringairport.org/explor...of-oshawa-buttonville-and-pickering-airports/

 

[MarkBrooks]

How?

This thing doesn't have serious investors. It doesn't have a detailed design. It doesn't have an EA. Etc.

Even the absolute best case scenario might be something like 5 years. And that would be record time for something like this. With lots of waivers. And risk acceptance by an unprecedented list of authorities.

Then let’s get those profiting from the status quo to stand back, and then just watch. Unfortunately best case is open by 2028 after a spring 2019 announcement. But a lot of construction jobs along the way.

 

[Johnny Au]

Pearson terminals are already split up by airline alliances.

Terminal 1 is for Star Alliance members (and unaffiliated Emirates), while Terminal 3 is for all other commercial airlines.

Pearson is Air Canada's fortress hub.

It would be interesting if SkyTeam or OneWorld makes Pickering a hub. However, that would require WestJet or a new major Canadian airline to join either airline alliance.

 

[squircle]

Also - the southern W/E runway pair is not far enough apart for independent take-off landing operation on each runway so one is used for take-offs and the other for landings in east/west wind conditions as shown below.

Do you have a source for this? I understand why it's undesirable from an operational perspective, and why it's unavailable for simultaneous instrument approaches (per ICAO rules). However, considering that the centrelines are 1000ft apart (exactly), I can't see why simultaneous approaches in VMC would be prohibited.

Anecdotally, I've seen/heard parallel approaches to 24L and 24R occasionally during busy periods. ATC generally warns of aircraft on approach to the adjacent runway. All approaches have either been visual or ILS in VMC.

If you know of any related regulations for lateral runway separation, either from Transport Canada or ICAO, please let me know -- I'm curious to research this further.

 

[MarkBrooks]

Do you have a source for this? I understand why it's undesirable from an operational perspective, and why it's unavailable for simultaneous instrument approaches (per ICAO rules). However, considering that the centrelines are 1000ft apart (exactly), I can't see why simultaneous approaches in VMC would be prohibited.

Anecdotally, I've seen/heard parallel approaches to 24L and 24R occasionally during busy periods. ATC generally warns of aircraft on approach to the adjacent runway. All approaches have either been visual or ILS in VMC.

If you know of any related regulations for lateral runway separation, either from Transport Canada or ICAO, please let me know -- I'm curious to research this further.

It’s a min of 1036 meters ( not feet) for simultaneous IFR operations on parallel runways assuming high quality radar etc. Transport Canada mins based on the latest icao standards. See attached. Until established parallel aircraft must also keep 3nm horizontal and a 1000ft vertical radar separation Closer operations can be done in VFR conditions if wake separation is waived .