micheal_can
Senior Member
Pearson should be for out of province and out of country large aircraft flights, whereas Pickering should become one for smaller, or more local domestic flights.
|
|
|
Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)
- Thread starter wyliepoon
- Start date
lenaitch
Senior Member
The problem is how do you make connections. The two sites are about 50km apart on opposite sides of a heavily urbanized area. A dedicated shuttle? In anybody's plans let alone anybody's budget?
micheal_can
Senior Member
Well, you could use a high speed train that basically follows Highway 407. There is enough space for it.
Neutrino
Senior Member
Express bus on the 407 transitway.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
Pearson could be for all Star Alliance airlines (both domestic and international) and non-alliance international airlines, while Pickering can be for all airlines belonging to an airline alliance that isn't Star Alliance (both domestic and international) and non-alliance domestic airlines.
After all, many airports segregate their terminals either by flight routing or by airline alliance.
Which airline alliance would be a fit for WestJet: SkyTeam or OneWorld (or a smaller alliance or no alliance)?
After all, many airports segregate their terminals either by flight routing or by airline alliance.
Which airline alliance would be a fit for WestJet: SkyTeam or OneWorld (or a smaller alliance or no alliance)?
Johnny Au
Senior Member
Here's a neat video by Wendover Productions:
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
There are a number of ways to split traffic between two airports in a region.
London Heathrow focuses on International long haul flights, Gatwick takes a mix of airport traffic (International, Domestic, Full Service, Low Cost), Stansted does mainly low cost airlines to Europe, Middle East, and Africa, Luton does mainly low cost airlines to Europe, Southend has emerged as another low cost airline airport, and City sees regional traffic mostly.
In NY JFK and Newark both focus on Domestic and International flights (with different airlines using either airport as their hub), while Laguardia sees mostly regional traffic.
There are many other examples where one airport focuses on International flights with the secondary focusing on regional flights and/or point to point style airlines. Air Canada would never allow their flight network to be split between two airports (especially given their current agreement with GTAA). So Pickering would have to attract a new regional/point to point/low cost airline, Westjet has grown out of their LCC roots and is truely more of a competitor to AC now. So unless Porter decides to move to Pickering there would have to be a new canadian airline for Pickering
London Heathrow focuses on International long haul flights, Gatwick takes a mix of airport traffic (International, Domestic, Full Service, Low Cost), Stansted does mainly low cost airlines to Europe, Middle East, and Africa, Luton does mainly low cost airlines to Europe, Southend has emerged as another low cost airline airport, and City sees regional traffic mostly.
In NY JFK and Newark both focus on Domestic and International flights (with different airlines using either airport as their hub), while Laguardia sees mostly regional traffic.
There are many other examples where one airport focuses on International flights with the secondary focusing on regional flights and/or point to point style airlines. Air Canada would never allow their flight network to be split between two airports (especially given their current agreement with GTAA). So Pickering would have to attract a new regional/point to point/low cost airline, Westjet has grown out of their LCC roots and is truely more of a competitor to AC now. So unless Porter decides to move to Pickering there would have to be a new canadian airline for Pickering
micheal_can
Senior Member
The decision not to extend the runways on the island has prevented Porter from expanding. Pickering could solve that.
kEiThZ
Superstar
First, no professional pilot or ops planner is using Piano X to simulate/calculate fuel burn.
Next, you keep talking about the Cseries and Q400 when the majority of the flights to these smaller cities in Ontario are 37 seat and 50 seat Dash 8s. I can’t tell if you don’t understand the difference between a Dash 8-200/300 and a Q400 or you are intentionally being disingenuous.
And? Airlines there adjusted by upgauging and rationalizing their slots. If Pearson gets to the point where it can’t even spare two slots a day for Timmins and Sudbury, you may have a point. But we aren’t anywhere close to that point yet. The half a dozen flights to these small centres shows they have plenty of slots to spare.
kEiThZ
Superstar
The age of separating international and domestic traffic is gone. Hubs exists specifically to feed international flights with connecting domestic traffic.
Who do you think is going to pay for this? Certainly won’t be the airlines and/or their passengers.
There’s no real way to force this. And if you move WestJet or any other carrier you are specifically advantaging Air Canada at Pearson, at the expense of other carriers. Pearson has the largest catchment and the best connections to the downtown core. Effectively, this means the highest yield. What are you going to tell WestJet about crushing their forward earnings with a forced move? And what are you going to do if foreign carriers and countries retaliate? How would you feel about BA complaining to the UK government and Air Canada being displaced from Heathrow to Gatwick or Stansted?
lenaitch
Senior Member
Perhaps my brain is stuck in a single-airport rut. Given that our local feeder airports are, in many cases, hundreds of kilometers away, do the experiences of these other major hubs directly translate? Does somebody hopping in from say, Albany NY or Bango ME, have to land at one airport then schlepp across town to another?
A dedicated rail/bus shuttle could probably do it provided it is part of the funded airport plan and not a 30-year later afterthough. Make it too inconvenient, expensive, convoluted, etc. and travellers from the feeder areas will say 'screw it' and drive.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Does happen. But it’s not common, with effectively only two airlines using LaGuardia (American and Delta).
Also, people forget the perimeter rule at LGA and DCA really limit the choice of destinations at these airports. In the rest of the world, airlines largely are concentrated at one airport in a given city. They don’t split wherever possible. Or really, really limit the split. For example, British Airways, isn’t really hubbing at Gatwick. It’s largely vacation flights catering to Londoners. Likewise London City is largely about servicing the City with business traffic to select regional business destinations.
No carrier will even entertain a conversation about moving without connectivity being similar to Pearson. They are already risking yields. They won’t risk traffic too.
micheal_can
Senior Member
What if you made Pickering the Cargo/small plane airport? So, companies like Fedex, DHL, UPS, etc could only fly into Pickering and not Pearson. Also, any 100 passenger or smaller plane lands in Pickering as well. Leave Pearson for all the heavy haulers. At the same time, a (high speed) rail line through the Mid City corridor be built.
lenaitch
Senior Member
Read several of the above posts. I doubt limiting freighters and biz jets would make much of a difference and, as far as I know, general aviation are already locked out of Pearson (could be wrong). A high speed dedicated rail linkage - paid for by whom? Left over money from all of the other transit needs? Toronto? Durham? Province? Feds?
micheal_can
Senior Member
I am not talking about general aviation. I am talking about a plane I would take from Sudbury to Toronto.
Did you notice the words high speed are in brackets? That means that ideally it would be that. Think of it more like the UPP Express. One train between Union and Pearson via the current ROW. One between Pearson and Pickering via the Midtown Corridor. One between Union and Pickering via the Richmond Hill line. Ideally, speeds of over 100km/hr, if not 150km/hr would be sufficient to allow fast enough transfers between 3 major hubs.