micheal_can
Senior Member
If that is the case, label it as a fantasy.
|
|
|
Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)
- Thread starter wyliepoon
- Start date
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
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.
micheal_can
Senior Member
So, this will get built one day?
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
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.
micheal_can
Senior Member
Which is even better for us as we simply call him out. Let us keep poking holes in his website.
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
I just report him. I don't think he should be bothered with.
micheal_can
Senior Member
We all have our was to beat the boredom.
rbt
Senior Member
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:
micheal_can
Senior Member
rbt
Senior Member
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.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Pickering would have a way better case if all they were pitching was a GA airport. But this insistence that it be designed as a reliever to Pearson is making it a non-starter.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
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?
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.
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
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 PickeringSome of the provinces get it, for instance
Airbus Joins Canada’s SAF+ Sustainable Fuel Consortium
Europe’s dominant airframe maker has committed to invest in SAF development and production in North America.www.ainonline.com
What is needed now is federal leadership with production incentives and for the industry to switch over to SAF.
MarkBrooks
Active Member
Some more background on Buttonvilles future and what the timeframe is:
Buttonville Airport’s Closure Expected to Hasten Pickering Airport’s Development - Friends of Pickering Airport
Print 🖨 PDF 📄 eBook 📱By Mark Brooks The recent announcement of Cadillac Fairview’s (CF) purchase of a 100% stake in Toronto Buttonville Airport has important implications for the development of an aerotropolis in nearby Pickering. Buttonville airport, a busy GA (General Aviation) and utility...
pickeringairport.org
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. .
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
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)?
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)?
MarkBrooks
Active Member
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:
- 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.
- 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)
- 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?