SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Canada (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   Canadian Airport Thread (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=153826)

thenoflyzone Sep 24, 2017 2:19 PM

TS to resume year round YQB-CDG as of December.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/...-round-in-s18/

Non stop was temporarily suspended since May 1, 2017, due to runway construction in YQB.

SFUVancouver Sep 24, 2017 4:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris (Post 7930459)
Dude, those CSeries are quieter than the Q400 turbopros that already fly out of there. They wouldn't have increased noise pollution out of Billy Bishop...in fact, if those flights would have replaced Q400 flights, they would have reduced noise pollution at Billy Bishop.

Your loss, man.

There's really no reasoning with people who have made up their mind. Furthermore, the overall operation of the C-Series would be significantly more quiet than the Q400 (or ATRs and any other turbo-prop, aircraft for that matter) because turboprop aircraft need to do engine run-ups that create a lot of noise in frequency ranges that travel a great distance. YVR invested a lot of resources to build noise-shielding for their ground run-up area to reduce the noise impacts on the neighbouring areas of Richmond and the City of Vancouver.

Here's a page about the recently-completed project: http://www.yvr.ca/en/about-yvr/noise...n-up-enclosure

wave46 Sep 25, 2017 1:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zmonkey (Post 7930441)
I think that person meant having those planes stop in Thunder Bay on the q400, like the Halifax flights stop in Ottawa/Montreal when they head east.

It strikes me as a 'But Why?' moment. Porter already has a Toronto hub (arguably in the best spot in the city) , which is fairly protected because of the ban on jets and the fact that Billy Bishop doesn't work with Air Canada's or Westjet's strategy.

At Waterloo, Westjet can stomp all over Porter if they want. Look at how Westjet is protecting their market share in the face of Flair Airlines' operation.

wave46 Sep 25, 2017 1:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso (Post 7931345)
Shelved is a more accurate assessment. Another proposal for runway expansion/approval of jets will surface when the political climate is more favourable. They wouldn't propose such a thing unless demand dictated expansion. We may not see another proposal for a long time, but it will re-surface eventually.

Fair enough.

DDP Sep 25, 2017 2:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 7932437)
It strikes me as a 'But Why?' moment. Porter already has a Toronto hub (arguably in the best spot in the city) , which is fairly protected because of the ban on jets and the fact that Billy Bishop doesn't work with Air Canada's or Westjet's strategy.

At Waterloo, Westjet can stomp all over Porter if they want. Look at how Westjet is protecting their market share in the face of Flair Airlines' operation.

Porter wants to expand, they appear to be going west, the planes need to stop stop somewhere on route.

Waterloo has very limited service out west, and airport is desperately trying to get some traction, especially for an area with a population that size.

The airport can also do something no other airports can, give someone a monopoly on routes, if porter says you cannot offer another airline flights to Manitoba and Sask, the airport can agree since it's owned by municipality. Porter gets to run its business as monopoly and try to make it work.

wave46 Sep 25, 2017 2:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDP (Post 7932486)
Porter wants to expand, they appear to be going west, the planes need to stop stop somewhere on route.

Waterloo has very limited service out west, and airport is desperately trying to get some traction, especially for an area with a population that size.

The airport can also do something no other airports can, give someone a monopoly on routes, if porter says you cannot offer another airline flights to Manitoba and Sask, the airport can agree since it's owned by municipality. Porter gets to run its business as monopoly and try to make it work.

Can the Airport Authority legally do that, though? Especially since they're owned by a municipality?

I'd imagine Westjet would scream about the anti-competitive behavior if preference were given to an airline.

kwoldtimer Sep 25, 2017 3:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 7932503)
Can the Airport Authority legally do that, though? Especially since they're owned by a municipality?

I'd imagine Westjet would scream about the anti-competitive behavior if preference were given to an airline.

The Region of Waterloo has already decided to give it a try, as I understand it. Proposals for exclusive rights for 24 months to flights originating at YKF are going to be received starting in October until January. Since Westjet already serves Calgary out of YKF, I don't imagine it could be considered for such a proposal.

wave46 Sep 25, 2017 3:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer (Post 7932533)
The Region of Waterloo has already decided to give it a try, as I understand it. Proposals for exclusive rights for 24 months to flights originating at YKF are going to be received starting in October until January. Since Westjet already serves Calgary out of YKF, I don't imagine it could be considered for such a proposal.

I stand corrected.

isaidso Sep 25, 2017 6:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer (Post 7932533)
The Region of Waterloo has already decided to give it a try, as I understand it. Proposals for exclusive rights for 24 months to flights originating at YKF are going to be received starting in October until January. Since Westjet already serves Calgary out of YKF, I don't imagine it could be considered for such a proposal.

Interesting. That's a pro-active and smart strategy. Do people call the airport 'Lexington' or is that a name no one uses? Given the population growth in southern Ontario both Lexington and Munro could develop into major GGH airports one day. Having one big airport in Pearson won't work indefinitely.

kwoldtimer Sep 25, 2017 6:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso (Post 7932789)
Interesting. That's a pro-active and smart strategy. Do people call the airport 'Lexington' or is that a name no one uses? Given the population growth in southern Ontario both Lexington and Munro could develop into major GGH airports one day. Having one big airport in Pearson won't work indefinitely.

I'm Kitchener born and raised and I have never heard of "Lexington Airport". I wonder if that doesn't relate to an earlier airstrip? The most common name for it would be "the Breslau airport", or just "Breslau". Years ago, when the City of Guelph also had an interest in it, it was the "Waterloo-Wellington Airport".

wave46 Sep 25, 2017 8:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso (Post 7932789)
Having one big airport in Pearson won't work indefinitely.

It always seems Hamilton's day is just 5 years off in the distance.

But yes, I agree - Pearson will eventually become too congested. I imagine it will end up being like the situation at Heathrow and Gatwick - one handles more low-cost and leisure carriers and the other is the premium international/domestic airport.

MamaSanchez Sep 25, 2017 9:12 PM

Mama wants!!!

https://cdn-enterprise.discourse.org...0262ee08c7.jpg

isaidso Sep 25, 2017 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer (Post 7932800)
I'm Kitchener born and raised and I have never heard of "Lexington Airport". I wonder if that doesn't relate to an earlier airstrip? The most common name for it would be "the Breslau airport", or just "Breslau". Years ago, when the City of Guelph also had an interest in it, it was the "Waterloo-Wellington Airport".

Google has 'Lexington' as its other name besides 'Waterloo Regional'. It's in reference to Lexington Road, apparently.

isaidso Sep 25, 2017 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wave46 (Post 7932918)
It always seems Hamilton's day is just 5 years off in the distance.

But yes, I agree - Pearson will eventually become too congested. I imagine it will end up being like the situation at Heathrow and Gatwick - one handles more low-cost and leisure carriers and the other is the premium international/domestic airport.

Maybe it finally will be Hamilton's time. Their economy has re-invented itself, GO Transit expansion is connecting it properly with Toronto, and real estate prices are taking off. Would be nice if one could take a GO Train directly from Hamilton to KW. I suppose that would be the next step after the current multi-year build concludes.

London, UK has 6 airports serving it: Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, Stansted, City, and London Southend. Only the last 2 are small. Eventually I can see the GGH having 5 significant airports over 10 million PAX: Billy Bishop, Pearson, Munro, Lexington, and a new one in Durham somewhere.

kwoldtimer Sep 26, 2017 2:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso (Post 7933106)
Google has 'Lexington' as its other name besides 'Waterloo Regional'. It's in reference to Lexington Road, apparently.

I looked on-line and it seems that "Lexington" airport was the K-W Municipal Airport located on the "east" side of Waterloo (on Lexington Rd) from 1930 to around 1951. The Waterloo-Wellington Airport, now Waterloo Region International, opened in 1951 and is located in Breslau, just across the Grand from the "east" side of Kitchener. The land on which the Lexington airport was located was sold and redeveloped.

wave46 Sep 26, 2017 2:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso (Post 7933108)
London, UK has 6 airports serving it: Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, Stansted, City, and London Southend. Only the last 2 are small. Eventually I can see the GGH having 5 significant airports over 10 million PAX: Billy Bishop, Pearson, Munro, Lexington, and a new one in Durham somewhere.

I'd say that it will be 3 - 4 at most:

Pearson = Heathrow
Munro = Gatwick
Billy Bishop = City
Waterloo = Luton/Stansted (that'll be way in the future)

Currently, London airports have 165m passengers passing through them, whereas Toronto area airports have less than 50 million, so I'd be very surprised if a Pickering Airport ever came to fruition.

zahav Sep 26, 2017 7:06 AM

Vancouver International Airport wins World Routes 2017 Marketing Awards

http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/...keting-awards/

Denscity Sep 26, 2017 8:18 AM

"Vancouver is North America's fastest growing international airport" I'm kinda surprised?

They also won in the 20-50 million category.

Zmonkey Sep 26, 2017 2:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso (Post 7933108)
Maybe it finally will be Hamilton's time. Their economy has re-invented itself, GO Transit expansion is connecting it properly with Toronto, and real estate prices are taking off. Would be nice if one could take a GO Train directly from Hamilton to KW. I suppose that would be the next step after the current multi-year build concludes.

London, UK has 6 airports serving it: Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, Stansted, City, and London Southend. Only the last 2 are small. Eventually I can see the GGH having 5 significant airports over 10 million PAX: Billy Bishop, Pearson, Munro, Lexington, and a new one in Durham somewhere.

London UK also has a metro population of 14 Million people, on an island so people pretty much have to fly, EU actually has real low cost carriers and a bigger tourist destination than most places in NA.

The UK is also very liberal and open to airline regulations, we in Canada are still very restrictive.

London needs all the airports, we just need Hamilton and Waterloo to start feeding some other big city hubs and link cities that are relatively close (Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, Calgary, Vancouver, some sun spots and a major US hub or two).

Or cut some of the taxes, and make flying cheaper and that may change.

casper Sep 26, 2017 3:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zmonkey (Post 7933576)
London UK also has a metro population of 14 Million people, on an island so people pretty much have to fly, EU actually has real low cost carriers and a bigger tourist destination than most places in NA.

The UK is also very liberal and open to airline regulations, we in Canada are still very restrictive.

London needs all the airports, we just need Hamilton and Waterloo to start feeding some other big city hubs and link cities that are relatively close (Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, Calgary, Vancouver, some sun spots and a major US hub or two).

Or cut some of the taxes, and make flying cheaper and that may change.

The uk well connected to content by rail.

A key driver to the situation in London is Heathrow
An airport that is operating at over capacity. Pearson still has lots of land available for terminal constriction and the runways are not overly committed.


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.