Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)

[micheal_can]

Why can't the demand be accommodated with larger airplanes at Pearson and an expansion of service in Hamilton? That's what I want answered.

Consider, for example, Air Canada's service to London Heathrow. The schedule for today has two 789 flights, one on a 77W and one on a 77L. Using Air Canada's seat counts from Wikipedia, that amounts to 1346 seats today to Heathrow. Let's assume that all four flights were switched to 450-seat 77Ws. That would increase the seat counts to 1800, an increase of 33.7%. Air Transat and Westjet fly to London Gatwick with smaller B763s, A310s and A332s. Upgauge those too and you can add a good bit more seats to the London area.

And what if AC needs another flight to London? Ask yourself if they really need three 37-seat and one 50-seat flights per day to Sault Ste. Marie. Would they not be better off with three 78 seat Q400 flights per day (adding 73 additional seats to Soo) and one additional slot (adding upto 450 seats) to London?

This is what I keep talking about. Pearson has plenty of room to increase capacity by the airlines there simply upgauging to existing destinations and rationalizing slots.

This doesn't really work though.

The location at Terminal 1 where Air Canada runs its flights to Sault Ste. Marie only handles small planes (Dash-8's, Q400's etc.). This is gates D1-D10.

So even if you got rid of a flight to Sault St. Marie (or Thunder Bay, London, Windsor, etc). you wouldn't be able to switch it to a larger Airbus or Boeing plane.

I am not suggesting switching Soo, TB, London, Windor flights to Airbus or Boeing. I am suggesting replacing 37 seat Dash-8-100s and 50 seat Dash-8-300s with fewer rotations of the 78 seat Q400s, which can still use the D gates. That saves landing slots.

Landing slots are not paired with specific gates. They are just landing slots. AC could then add other Boeing or Airbus narrowbody or widebody flights to other destinations operating out of other gates.

Long term, Pearson has time to discuss adding more gates for narrowbodies, so that places like Timmins and Sudbury can eventually get mainline service with the CSeries.

Letss take my current Airport of Sudbury. Currently, Air Canada flies 5 flights in and out. Now, lets say to add capacity, they cut the number to 4, but have bigger planes in. That could work, but you might then have passengers not liking those times and drive.

Porter also flies to Sudbury, so, someone might decide to just fly with them instead. Now Air Canada looses business.

You might think that people might be flying Air Canada for the connections, but with the UP, you could feasibly take Porter, then UP, then get on Westjet. That is even more loss. Removing times they fly is not a reasonable thing to suggest. Bigger planes at the same time, might work.

But this is why an airport that is close to Pearson connected with rapid transit, such as UP would work. I come in to Pickering, hope RT to Pearson to fly on the big plane. Hamilton's is too far away and has no RT to it, so it would not work.

 

[kEiThZ]

Letss take my current Airport of Sudbury. Currently, Air Canada flies 5 flights in and out. Now, lets say to add capacity, they cut the number to 4, but have bigger planes in. That could work, but you might then have passengers not liking those times and drive.

Sorry. I don't buy that. Let's look at Sudbury in a bit more detail:

https://flightaware.com/live/findflight?origin=CYYZ&destination=CYSB

First flight 0815. Last departure at 2215. That's 14 hrs. With 5 flights that works out to an average spacing of 3.5 hrs. With 4 flights, the average spacing would increase to 4.7 hrs. I don't buy that an increase of 1.2 hrs would prompt people to make a 4 hr drive to the GTA (especially given the weather up there for half the year).

Note that the actual schedule has flights as little as 1.5 hrs apart to nearly 4 hrs apart today. So clearly people who are inclined to fly aren't all that concerned about the schedule today. When you live in places like Sudbury, choices are limited. Your only real alternative is to drive. And if anybody is driving, their motivation is most certainly not to save an hour or two.

Porter also flies to Sudbury, so, someone might decide to just fly with them instead. Now Air Canada looses business.

You might think that people might be flying Air Canada for the connections, but with the UP, you could feasibly take Porter, then UP, then get on Westjet. That is even more loss. Removing times they fly is not a reasonable thing to suggest.

Infrastructure isn't and shouldn't be built with the profits of certain corporations as primary drivers. Public interest is paramount. If Air Canada loses traffic to Porter that's their problem. But somehow, in your particular example, I really, really doubt this is a significant concern at all. Are there people flying to YTZ and then taking the UPE to catch a flight at YYZ? Sure. But they are probably low yielding enough that AC isn't likely to care all that much about their business. AC will take the pax who are willing to pay the premium for an easy connection.

But this is why an airport that is close to Pearson connected with rapid transit, such as UP would work. I come in to Pickering, hope RT to Pearson to fly on the big plane. Hamilton's is too far away and has no RT to it, so it would not work.

Ummm, by your own assertion you can do this with Porter at the Island today. Why then is Pickering needed?

Note that you are the only one talking about split operations. As several of us keep reiterating, this is not the norm for most carriers worldwide. And carriers fight hard to avoid it where they can. Heck, most carriers do everything they can to avoid getting split into different terminals at major airports. Moreover, the argument for Pickering has never been about split operations. Even proponents of the airport don't push this point. It's been about facilitating growth on new entrants. So if that's the pitch then it's nearly as good in Hamilton as it is in Pickering. I don't see a substantial difference in Flair, Norwegian or Allegiant flying to Hamilton vs. Pickering.

As for AC itself, if Pearson ever got full, they won't move their Express flights to another airport. They exist to feed the rest of the network. They will cut flights and upgauge aircraft, and then reallocate those slots. You'd better believe that if a slot going to a flight to Sudbury makes them more profit with a flight to London, they will cut that flight to Sudbury and use the slot to launch another service to London. Were AC to ever use another airport in the GTAH, it would be similar to British Airways at Gatwick: a flight schedule that caters almost entirely to origin-destination traffic from London. That is to say any AC flights at Pickering or Hamilton would be entirely about serving destinations Torontonians want to travel to. Regional connections would all stay at Pearson.

 

[micheal_can]

Sorry. I don't buy that. Let's look at Sudbury in a bit more detail:

https://flightaware.com/live/findflight?origin=CYYZ&destination=CYSB

First flight 0815. Last departure at 2215. That's 14 hrs. With 5 flights that works out to an average spacing of 3.5 hrs. With 4 flights, the average spacing would increase to 4.7 hrs. I don't buy that an increase of 1.2 hrs would prompt people to make a 4 hr drive to the GTA (especially given the weather up there for half the year).

Note that the actual schedule has flights as little as 1.5 hrs apart to nearly 4 hrs apart today. So clearly people who are inclined to fly aren't all that concerned about the schedule today. When you live in places like Sudbury, choices are limited. Your only real alternative is to drive. And if anybody is driving, their motivation is most certainly not to save an hour or two.

Infrastructure isn't and shouldn't be built with the profits of certain corporations as primary drivers. Public interest is paramount. If Air Canada loses traffic to Porter that's their problem. But somehow, in your particular example, I really, really doubt this is a significant concern at all. Are there people flying to YTZ and then taking the UPE to catch a flight at YYZ? Sure. But they are probably low yielding enough that AC isn't likely to care all that much about their business. AC will take the pax who are willing to pay the premium for an easy connection.

Ummm, by your own assertion you can do this with Porter at the Island today. Why then is Pickering needed?

Note that you are the only one talking about split operations. As several of us keep reiterating, this is not the norm for most carriers worldwide. And carriers fight hard to avoid it where they can. Heck, most carriers do everything they can to avoid getting split into different terminals at major airports. Moreover, the argument for Pickering has never been about split operations. Even proponents of the airport don't push this point. It's been about facilitating growth on new entrants. So if that's the pitch then it's nearly as good in Hamilton as it is in Pickering. I don't see a substantial difference in Flair, Norwegian or Allegiant flying to Hamilton vs. Pickering.

As for AC itself, if Pearson ever got full, they won't move their Express flights to another airport. They exist to feed the rest of the network. They will cut flights and upgauge aircraft, and then reallocate those slots. You'd better believe that if a slot going to a flight to Sudbury makes them more profit with a flight to London, they will cut that flight to Sudbury and use the slot to launch another service to London. Were AC to ever use another airport in the GTAH, it would be similar to British Airways at Gatwick: a flight schedule that caters almost entirely to origin-destination traffic from London. That is to say any AC flights at Pickering or Hamilton would be entirely about serving destinations Torontonians want to travel to. Regional connections would all stay at Pearson.

As I sad before, I do not see a need for this airport right now. However, if they wanted it to work, I am suggesting options that would work. It is similar thinking that the DRL not going to Union is a good thing.

So, what should really be done?
Upgrade RT to all current airports in the GTHA. This includes some sort of rail RT to the Island, Hamilton's, and to Kitchener's. That could do more for the area than the construction of this airport.

 

[mdrejhon]

Rather than building Pickering, it would be cheaper to have GO service to the Hamilton airport and expand YHM to relieve YYZ. There is a lot of underutilized airport capacity at YHM and can be upgraded over the next 20 years.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Rather than building Pickering, it would be cheaper to have GO service to the Hamilton airport and expand YHM to relieve YYZ. There is a lot of underutilized airport capacity at YHM and can be upgraded over the next 20 years.

Yup, the right of way exists up Hamilton Mountain already, just need some new track to connect to the airport. If you ran trains from Hamilton Airport along the Lakeshore West Line, up the Canpa Sub, and along the Kitchener Corridor to the new Pearson Union Station West, you could connect the two airports with a frequent train (I understand MAJOR infrastructure improvements would be needed).

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Hamilton suffers from such poor accessibility. Improving that should be a priority anyway.

That said I don't think an improved Hamilton does much for the 3 million plus people living east of the DVP/404.

But yeah let's also invest in Hamilton as well.

 

[MarkBrooks]

Yup, the right of way exists up Hamilton Mountain already, just need some new track to connect to the airport. If you ran trains from Hamilton Airport along the Lakeshore West Line, up the Canpa Sub, and along the Kitchener Corridor to the new Pearson Union Station West, you could connect the two airports with a frequent train (I understand MAJOR infrastructure improvements would be needed).

And don’t forget the jetA pipeline to Hamilton, trucking it in doesn’t do it. Note: Pickering has both rail and a pipeline ( same pipe right of way that feeds Pearson Jet A ).

See :

Is building out Hamilton airport a better idea than Pickering airport?

Opponents of Pickering airport often point to Hamilton airport as a possible solution to the Toronto regions jet airport capacity limitations. Hamilton politicians and business leaders think so, …

pickeringairport.org

 

[kEiThZ]

That said I don't think an improved Hamilton does much for the 3 million plus people living east of the DVP/404.

Does plenty. Relieves some of the load at Pearson, and is way easier than driving to Buffalo. And recapturing that Buffalo crowd is the real goal of any second GTA airport. Offer flights cheap enough that people aren't incentivized to drive to Buffalo and cross the border to take those flights. And then divert all new LCC and ULCC carriers to a new airport. Anybody that price sensitive will drive to Hamilton.

 

[jcam]

As I sad before, I do not see a need for this airport right now. However, if they wanted it to work, I am suggesting options that would work. It is similar thinking that the DRL not going to Union is a good thing.

So, what should really be done?
Upgrade RT to all current airports in the GTHA. This includes some sort of rail RT to the Island, Hamilton's, and to Kitchener's. That could do more for the area than the construction of this airport.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Ontario Line jogged down from Queen Spadina, CityPlace (interchange with new Barrie GO line , station), then made its way to Bathurst and Lakeshore for Billy Bishop, then on to Exhibition.

 

[jaybe]

Hamilton suffers from such poor accessibility. Improving that should be a priority anyway.

That said I don't think an improved Hamilton does much for the 3 million plus people living east of the DVP/404.

But yeah let's also invest in Hamilton as well.

Interesting comment because it made me double check population numbers. The population of the GTHA is 7m. The total GTHA population living east of the DVP/404 (Scarborough, Markham and Durham Region) is 1.62M, roughly half the 3 million you mention. The population of the Greater Golden Horseshoe is 9.3M with most of the additional 2.3M people living close to Hamilton in the Niagara Region, Brantford and K-W.

You've made a great point, this regions' population will be far better served by an airport in Hamilton than an airport in Pickering. So, yeah let's invest in Hamilton!

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Interesting comment because it made me double check population numbers. The population of the GTHA is 7m. The total GTHA population living east of the DVP/404 (Scarborough, Markham and Durham Region) is 1.62M, roughly half the 3 million you mention. The population of the Greater Golden Horseshoe is 9.3M with most of the additional 2.3M people living close to Hamilton in the Niagara Region, Brantford and K-W.

You've made a great point, this regions' population will be far better served by an airport in Hamilton than an airport in Pickering. So, yeah let's invest in Hamilton!

Ooops I did do the population count and something in my memory said it was 3 million. However I do stand corrected 1.62 million is the more accurate population figure.

 

[jzair]

You've made a great point, this regions' population will be far better served by an airport in Hamilton than an airport in Pickering. So, yeah let's invest in Hamilton!

Assuming your stats are correct it still does not justify for a large international airport in Hamilton. Pearson is in Mississauga which is very west of the 404/DVP and for people to drive there from the east GTA can be extremely onerous considering how jam-packed the 401 always is (this is their only option). Meanwhile more options are already present for people coming from the west, i.e. folks at Kitchener or Burlington have the option of Pearson or Hamilton through 401 or 403 etc.
I don't think we need a shiny gigantic terminal in Pickering but there needs to be some sort of anchor for east GTA which can spur further development.

 

[micheal_can]

Interesting comment because it made me double check population numbers. The population of the GTHA is 7m. The total GTHA population living east of the DVP/404 (Scarborough, Markham and Durham Region) is 1.62M, roughly half the 3 million you mention. The population of the Greater Golden Horseshoe is 9.3M with most of the additional 2.3M people living close to Hamilton in the Niagara Region, Brantford and K-W.

You've made a great point, this regions' population will be far better served by an airport in Hamilton than an airport in Pickering. So, yeah let's invest in Hamilton!

Assuming your stats are correct it still does not justify for a large international airport in Hamilton. Pearson is in Mississauga which is very west of the 404/DVP and for people to drive there from the east GTA can be extremely onerous considering how jam-packed the 401 always is (this is their only option). Meanwhile more options are already present for people coming from the west, i.e. folks at Kitchener or Burlington have the option of Pearson or Hamilton through 401 or 403 etc.
I don't think we need a shiny gigantic terminal in Pickering but there needs to be some sort of anchor for east GTA which can spur further development.

Does someone want to run the numbers of East of Peel Region, including Peel Region, and then West of Peel Region, not including Peel Region? I would be that we might see that there is obviously more people east than west, but the overall numbers become moot when we look at other places like London folks going to Hamilton instead of Buffalo or Detroit.

 

[kEiThZ]

Interesting comment because it made me double check population numbers. The population of the GTHA is 7m. The total GTHA population living east of the DVP/404 (Scarborough, Markham and Durham Region) is 1.62M, roughly half the 3 million you mention. The population of the Greater Golden Horseshoe is 9.3M with most of the additional 2.3M people living close to Hamilton in the Niagara Region, Brantford and K-W.

Bingo. Despite what they claim, Pickering is really about splitting Pearson's traffic. Not so much about adding capacity to the region and facilitating a growing population. The GTHA's population centre is shifting westward. And the wider catchment area of Hamilton is growing substantially fast. Of the top 5 fastest growing CMAs in the country, three (London, Windsor, KW) are closest to Hamilton:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/stats-can-population-census-1.5075855

Only one is close to Pickering (Peterborough). And if we ever do build HFR, Peterborough gets an express train to Pearson....

 

[kEiThZ]

I would be that we might see that there is obviously more people east than west,

And? It's not like Peel residents aren't in Hamilton's effective catchment. Square One to Hamilton airport is a 50 minute drive. Maybe a 1hr 15 mins in traffic. Plenty of folks will do that for a cheaper fare. Heck, might take almost that long getting to Pickering in traffic!

If you're building a large second airport, to rival Pearson, you have to cover where the actual population growth is. The Eastern GTA is actually quite well served by Pearson and the Island. Really, it's KWC, London, Hamilton, Burlington and Brantford that aren't well served by Pearson.

Look at the map. Look at where traffic is. Look at the areas of major population growth. Look at areas that are underserved. Look at where the infrastructure already is. Hamilton seems like a no-brainer to me. Just to build what's there at Hamilton today would probably take over a decade in Pickering.