|
|
|
Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)
- Thread starter wyliepoon
- Start date
rbt
Senior Member
Yep. It's not uncommon for discount carriers to pick airports lacking a premium transit connection; many shuttles to nearby railway stations heading into the city.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I think it's $375 million over 20 years. But that gets them to the point of being able to handle 2.5 million passengers annually, or about 28 Boeing 737 flights per day (as per their metric). The initial $35 million should get them to about 500 000 passengers per year in capacity (6-9 flights per day).
For reference, Billy Bishop does closer to 3 million, without any jets.
Compare it to Hamilton. Hamilton has longer and wider runways. It's got lots of ramp space. It's got a terminal that apparently should be able to handle up to 3 million annually already. Already has more destinations, has transatlantic service and is already at 700k passengers, on their way to a million. Hamilton also handled half a million kilos in cargo.
Hamilton International Airport sees growth in passengers, cargo and land expansion lift off
Hamilton airport's passenger numbers increased 118 per cent from 333,368 in 2016 to 725,630 in 2018.
www.hamiltonnews.com
Waterloo would need a lot more investment to just catch up to where Hamilton is. Indeed, the entire $375 million 20-year plan would basically get them on par with Hamilton. And only for passenger capacity. Not total output.
I do agree that Waterloo might be more accessible after RER than Hamilton. And given that Waterloo is where the tech sector is and flights are largely private jet traffic supporting the tech sector there, there's a good argument for expanded passenger service out of there. At minimum, I do think they have a strong case for their expansion plan to be accelerated. But as far as a true Pearson reliever, I'd argue that Hamilton is the better candidate.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Will add, there needs to be a discussion on why airport expansion is needed. Is it to meet the needs of the region or simply to accommodate more successful hubbing by AC and WS. Are there destinations from the GTA that are severely underdeserved by a constrained Pearson? I don't see it.
If it's about AC and WS growing their hub, well that's what Montreal is there for. AC is already growing their hub at Dorval, and the airport is embarking on a massive development plan akin to what Pearson went through last decade. I'd argue that some of the hubbing activities could and should shift to Montreal.
montrealgazette.com
If it's about AC and WS growing their hub, well that's what Montreal is there for. AC is already growing their hub at Dorval, and the airport is embarking on a massive development plan akin to what Pearson went through last decade. I'd argue that some of the hubbing activities could and should shift to Montreal.
Montreal's Trudeau airport to get $2.5-billion facelift
New terminal, covered parking lot and bigger "kiss-and-fly" drop-off zones among highlights of expansion to last until 2030.
montrealgazette.com
Last edited:
MarkBrooks
Active Member
A simple question:
In your view, what would mayor Ryan have to do to make it more obvious that voting for him was voting for the airport?
Mayor Ryan made it a core part of his campaign starting back in 2017, as did most of the re-elected council ditto for John Henry, the regional chair.
For example the mayor and council passed a motion in council in 2017 calling for the airport:
City of Pickering Supports Development of an Airport
City of Pickering Supports Development of an Airport
Mayor Ryan specifically called for the airport to be build on multiple occasions before the Oct 2018 vote.
Their opponents opposed the airport. The Pro airport guys won, the anti airport crew lost.
How is that not overwhelming public support for the airport?
In the end the only poll that counts is on election day.
Federally! We get to see a rerun of this poll this October.
Even Jennifer O’Connell, the last Liberal to oppose the airport is now wisely no longer saying a word in opposition.
what would you like to see the candidates do to make their support for the airport more obvious?
nfitz
Superstar
A simple question doesn't have have 11 paragraphs! LOL!
Well, he could have actually mentioned it in his platform. He does't ... it's missing from http://www.daveryan.ca
And yet he doesn't even mention it on his platform. Which talks about GO Station pedestrian bridges, a Lakeridge Health expansion, Durham Live, a vital city centre, a $26 million youth and senors centre ...
Why are you saying things that are not true? If the vast majority of Pickering supports the airport, and if he only won because he supports the airport and his opponent didn't it, then he would have been highlighting this - not avoiding mentioning it!
Did he mention it sometime, somewhere ... sure. Was it a significant part of the election. No. Why come here with huge exaggerations and mistruths?
I now no longer support the airport, with the proponents for it so blatantly mislead and spin. If the airport requires such lies and deception to justify it, then clearly something is rotten!
Expanding Hamilton and Waterloo is surely a much better option for a few years.
Perhaps the land should be protected, and this revisited in the year 2100 or 2200, depending on demand.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
Indeed. I am more ambivalent on this airport than it would seem. But Marks' not helping his cause here by putting a wall of BS, lie after lie, avoiding direct answers and debating in bad faith. When you have to do that, it's indeed suspicious.
I get a sense that Pickering proponents are just desperate and concerned that the feds might just turn over the land to the park or to be developed and they'll have lost their airport.
The KPMG study is due to finish this year. It will answer a lot of questions when it comes out. There may well be a case for Pickering that doesn't simply involve enabling higher frequencies to the same cities that Pearson connects to already. Will be interesting to see what they say about the capital costs. And whether that capital is best applied to a brand new airport or expanding current ones.
micheal_can
Senior Member
What I don't see is how could another airport so close to Pearson do anything to relieve Pearson.
So, pretend we are all idiots. Show us how having 2 airports in Toronto will work to relieve one.
So, pretend we are all idiots. Show us how having 2 airports in Toronto will work to relieve one.
MarkBrooks
Active Member
In addition to the motion championed by Mayor Ryan a year before he was re-elected( here it is again )
We have council members going on the record debating and passing a motion of support for the airport in Durham region just this year :
www.durham.ca
And the town of Ajax:
www.durhamregion.com
Straight forward, Democracy in action. Some for, some against .
Perhaps Claremont and Stouffville should try the same ? This is an important issue and councilors should but their opposition or support on the record.
We have council members going on the record debating and passing a motion of support for the airport in Durham region just this year :
Regional Council confirms support of Pickering airport
Whitby, Ont. – Durham Regional Council has confirmed its support, in principle, for the development of an airport in the City of Pickering. “Airports are valuable economic drivers in the ...
www.durham.ca
And the town of Ajax:
Ajax supports a Pickering airport, provided the facts support one
If the business case is there, Ajax supports an airport in Pickering.
www.durhamregion.com
Straight forward, Democracy in action. Some for, some against .
Perhaps Claremont and Stouffville should try the same ? This is an important issue and councilors should but their opposition or support on the record.
Last edited:
MarkBrooks
Active Member
I point you to the many successful examples secondary jet airports working side by side with a major hub.
Chicago O’Hare and Midway airport.
Heathrow and Gatwick ( and Stansted)
JFK and LaGuardia
To name but a few.
micheal_can
Senior Member
That does not point out how the largest city in a country with a small population and 2 major air carriers can make 2 airports close to each other actually work. The USA has 10 airlines. UK also has 10 major ones.
MarkBrooks
Active Member
Ok, I have tried to capture the conversation ( both public and private) on rail and aviation and what this means for Toronto and Pickering Airport here:
pickeringairport.org
Not saying that this is a perfect capture of the issue, so consider this a draft, and yes I am busy as a mad hatter ( Twin otter run today Toronto to Montreal and back) so please excuse the typos... but hey I fly for a living, god help me if I had to earn a living writing.
Pickering Airport Symbiosis with Passenger Rail
In the 19th century, passenger rail displaced the horse and buggy and steamship as the preferred mode of intercity travel in Canada. In the 20th century the automobile and air travel displaced pass…
pickeringairport.org
Not saying that this is a perfect capture of the issue, so consider this a draft, and yes I am busy as a mad hatter ( Twin otter run today Toronto to Montreal and back) so please excuse the typos... but hey I fly for a living, god help me if I had to earn a living writing.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Cities with larger metro area populations than Toronto.
And technically Toronto has two busy airports: Island and Pearson.
Ok, I have tried to capture the conversation ( both public and private) on rail and aviation and what this means for Toronto and Pickering Airport here:
Pickering Airport Symbiosis with Passenger Rail
In the 19th century, passenger rail displaced the horse and buggy and steamship as the preferred mode of intercity travel in Canada. In the 20th century the automobile and air travel displaced pass…
Not saying that this is a perfect capture of the issue, so consider this a draft, and yes I am busy as a mad hatter ( Twin otter run today Toronto to Montreal and back) so please excuse the typos... but hey I fly for a living, god help me if I had to earn a living writing.
At least you're finally starting to think outside the box. Nobody should be building airports in this day and age to cater to trips of 500 km.
narduch
Senior Member
Just to reiterate Keith's point about Air Canada upgrading to larger planes:
I've noticed on 2 routes that I use to take a lot for work from Toronto: Thunder Bay and Quebec City. AC has switched from Q400's to some sort of Rouge
Airbus. I haven't checked the Thunder Bay schedule but I know for sure they offer less daily flights to Quebec City now.
They have lots of room to continue doing this to free up gates and slots.
I've noticed on 2 routes that I use to take a lot for work from Toronto: Thunder Bay and Quebec City. AC has switched from Q400's to some sort of Rouge
Airbus. I haven't checked the Thunder Bay schedule but I know for sure they offer less daily flights to Quebec City now.
They have lots of room to continue doing this to free up gates and slots.
MarkBrooks
Active Member
Yes, the squeeze is on for bigger AIrcraft into the existing constrained slots ( air Canada had 56% of Pearson slots before the Air Transat purchase). no reason why the cant shift those slots from domestic to more profitable international routes. Good for the shareholders, but bad reducing local travel choices. I would Expect domestic ticket prices to trend up as the squeeze takes hold, in line with urban strategies report on the topic.
You should note that Howard Eng, CEO of the GTAA disagrees with you on your “plenty of room comment”. He called uncle on capacity in May.
See
https://pickeringairport.org/somac-announced-gtaa-joins-voices-calling-for-pickering-airport/
You should note that Howard Eng, CEO of the GTAA disagrees with you on your “plenty of room comment”. He called uncle on capacity in May.
See
https://pickeringairport.org/somac-announced-gtaa-joins-voices-calling-for-pickering-airport/