kEiThZ
Superstar
Doesn't work on larger aircraft.
|
|
|
Toronto Pearson International Airport
- Thread starter p5connex
- Start date
Doesn't work on larger aircraft.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I would have thought the same thing for an arrestor bed, that has to contain planes whose weights vary by orders of magnitude.
Amare
Senior Member
Congrats to the NIMBYs for making air transport more expensive for all:
Some notable quotes from the story:
"A number of airports in Europe use financial mechanisms, in particular a noise charge added to the landing/take-off fee, to incentivize airlines to use the quietest aircraft types possible," the report says.
The report also recommends that the GTAA specifically target the notoriously noisy Airbus A320, which can be retrofitted for quieter operation. Those planes make up 20 per cent of Pearson traffic, according to the GTAA.
The GTAA says it will now begin work on a "quieter fleet incentive program" within the next 18 to 24 months, though it has not yet determined how it would encourage airlines to retrofit their planes or use quieter new models.
"We're going to explore whether we can use an incentive or fine program," said Hillary Marshall, vice president of stakeholder relations and communications.
Marshall said the GTAA would also consider funding a program to provide noise insulation to homes in the busiest flight paths around the airport.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/pearson-noise-management-1.4311949
Some notable quotes from the story:
"A number of airports in Europe use financial mechanisms, in particular a noise charge added to the landing/take-off fee, to incentivize airlines to use the quietest aircraft types possible," the report says.
The report also recommends that the GTAA specifically target the notoriously noisy Airbus A320, which can be retrofitted for quieter operation. Those planes make up 20 per cent of Pearson traffic, according to the GTAA.
The GTAA says it will now begin work on a "quieter fleet incentive program" within the next 18 to 24 months, though it has not yet determined how it would encourage airlines to retrofit their planes or use quieter new models.
"We're going to explore whether we can use an incentive or fine program," said Hillary Marshall, vice president of stakeholder relations and communications.
Marshall said the GTAA would also consider funding a program to provide noise insulation to homes in the busiest flight paths around the airport.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/pearson-noise-management-1.4311949
mdrejhon
Senior Member
Coincidential timing with the 219% USA duty on the very quiet Bombardier C-Series airplanes.
allabootmatt
Senior Member
Even more peak-season international flying by AC, plus the Santiago and Buenos Aires flight being split into two routes (presumably meaning double the capacity): https://canadianaviationnews.wordpr...ope-south-america-and-africa-for-summer-2018/
The way things are going, I am astounded GTAA hasn’t announced the beginning of construction on a new pier yet - perhaps to take over US flights and leave all of F for international. Evenings in the hammerhead are a madhouse already, and a new concourse is going to be what, five years away at best?
The way things are going, I am astounded GTAA hasn’t announced the beginning of construction on a new pier yet - perhaps to take over US flights and leave all of F for international. Evenings in the hammerhead are a madhouse already, and a new concourse is going to be what, five years away at best?
TransitBart
Senior Member
You have that right. It’s quite crowded and unpleasant at Pearson and the Hammerhead with the tables in place of the seats in the waiting areas is particularly tight and unpleasant.
Last edited:
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
The 2007 plan was for the new pier (G) to be all USA trans border flights, leaving F for International just as you described. I agree, F is getting cramped what with some of the restaurants taking up space on the outer perimeter (which should be reserved for seated waiting areas) and all the shopping areas shoehorned into the interior of the hammerhead. However the GTAA is apparently working on a new Master plan and it will be interesting to see if they abandon the plans for pier G and beyond for their multi modal transportation hub plan.
In all honestly though construction of pier G should really have begun in late 2015 early 2016 when the GTAA began breaking its passenger movement records, it would then be just completing construction now and ready to open.
Ah well.
jcam
Active Member
I think they would likely go ahead with pier G regardless, and the hub would replace what would've otherwise been H/I by adding gates to the roadside of the current ticket hall.
muller877
Senior Member
Pier G has to be rethought based on the increased size of planes. They need more seating, more restaurants and fewer gates. With this changing flight capacity they could not use a 10 year old plan.
Pure speculation but I expect that they are looking at connecting T1 and T3 together as part of the expansion strategy (which will beg the question where does the RapidAir gates go?). And T3 will be used for all USA flights.
This means pedestrian/transit connections to effectively move people between terminals for connecting flights.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
Yes, larger aircraft mean fewer gates but more concourse/terminal space. 10 gates serving a 100 seat aircraft only needs room/amenities for 1,000 people, if the aircrafts now seat 110 passengers than the terminal needs to accommodate 1,100 people or the equivalent of another plane/gate.
Eventually I think Terminal 1 and 3 will be connected but I don't see that as a urgent priority. Instead a post security inter terminal transport could fill the role of connecting the two terminals to each other.
For the RapidAir gates there really aren't many gates there, and they could be incorporated into the connection between the two terminals. There are really only 6 commuter gates that are on the "other side of the terminal" which would eaten up by a connecting structure and there is enough room between the two terminals to build the gates as part of the connecting structure. They might have to sacrifice 1 or 2 of the B gates on terminal 3's B pier which given that they are Domestic/International gates would not be much of a loss given that this would probably be accompanied by construction of the USA pier G, which would free up gates on pier/Hammerhead F. For example if the USA pier were built than gates F36, F34, F32, F51, F53, F55, and F57 would not need to be swing gates for Domestic/USA flights and would permanently be Domestic gates.
I believe T3 will become a Low Cost terminal.
**EDIT**
Per this:
https://torontopearson.com/uploadedFiles/Pearson/Content/About_Pearson/Community_Relations/Committees/Consultative_Committee/A06 - CC update - 2017-09-27.docx.pdf
An update to the new Master Plan will be provided Oct 4.
Last edited:
jje1000
Senior Member
Nice. I hope we get some nice renderings and fleshed out timelines tomorrow.
nfitz
Superstar
Oh, I saw that at Terminal 3 back in March, and had completely forgotten about it (was flying to UK with small kids - didn't sleep again for quite a while).
That was awful. And the tables (with *&@(# ipods everywhere) were all but completely abandoned, and everyone squished into not enough seats. Very bizarre.
reetard
Active Member
jcam
Active Member
That's the old one.
raptor
Senior Member
Isn't it the old master plan from 2008?