Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Open Baldonnel for Civil Flights ASAP

Options
  • 26-08-2006 8:08pm
    #1
    DublinWriter
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭


    So there I was today, in the human zoo otherwise known as Dublin Airport and there was barely standing room in the departures hall.

    The thought occured to me: WTF is Baldonnel not developed as Dublin's second airport? It's in an ideal southside location and close to arterial roadways.

    Methinks the reason Baldonnel is not used as it makes a lovely little private airport for Bertie and the usual cronies.

    Answers on a postcard please.


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    weehamster
    Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭weehamster


    It was the first preference, however locals complained to their TD In Dublin Mid Wets. Thats right it was everybodys favorate fat cow, Mary Harney. Mary_Harney.jpg

    Now people who live near Dublin Aiport will have even more noise when the new terminals and runways open, causing more planes fly over their heads. :mad:


  • Options
    #3
    Maskhadov
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭Maskhadov


    I've a better idea. sell Baldonnel off and reinvest the money in a fighter programme for the aircorps.


  • Options
    #4
    DublinWriter
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭DublinWriter


    Maskhadov wrote:
    I've a better idea. sell Baldonnel off and reinvest the money in a fighter programme for the aircorps.
    Let us know when the obvious flaw in that particular argument occurs to you.


  • Options
    #5
    Vorsprung
    Registered Users Posts: 2,814 ✭✭✭Vorsprung


    DublinWriter wrote:
    Let us know when the obvious flaw in that particular argument occurs to you.

    :D:D


  • Options
    #6
    Maskhadov
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭Maskhadov


    what wrong with selling it off ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    therecklessone
    Registered Users Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    DublinWriter wrote:
    Methinks the reason Baldonnel is not used as it makes a lovely little private airport for Bertie and the usual cronies.

    1. Local objections, though why the government doesn't just grow a set of balls and make a bloody decision I don't know...

    2. Air Corps objections, they don't want civil access to Bal.

    Bertie doesn't even use Bal, he insists on the MATS fkying from Bal to Dub to pick him up...even has an AC chopper drop him off in Drumcondra every now and then...:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #8
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    DublinWriter wrote:
    Let us know when the obvious flaw in that particular argument occurs to you.

    What flaw, they could use Gormonston as a base for any fighter squad they plan.


  • Options
    #9
    therecklessone
    Registered Users Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    Maskhadov wrote:
    what wrong with selling it off ?

    In the absence of you expanding on your brain wave, it seems your suggesting they sell off the AC's only airbase to buy fighters which will be based where?


  • Options
    #10
    therecklessone
    Registered Users Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    GerardKeating wrote:
    What flaw, they could use Gormonston as a base for any fighter squad they plan.

    Are you taking the piss?


  • Options
    #11
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    DublinWriter wrote:
    .
    .
    .
    The thought occured to me: WTF is Baldonnel not developed as Dublin's second airport? It's in an ideal southside location and close to arterial roadways.
    .
    .
    .
    Answers on a postcard please.

    You mean apart from the fact that there is no terminal building, but you you have to Building a new terminal building, might as well do it at the existing Airport.

    Also the runway is in rag order, not suitable for civil use.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    therecklessone wrote:
    Are you taking the piss?

    What's wrong with that.

    Also, if they ever develop a Fighter wing, why does it even have to be in Dublin, a base somewhere in the Midlands, equidistance from Shannon and Dublin would be ideal, both need to be covered and flying time to either would not be that much.


  • Options
    #13
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    DublinWriter wrote:
    Let us know when the obvious flaw in that particular argument occurs to you.
    post of the week.....OK i know it is not exactly correct but it still gave me a chuckle...


    ...Oh and the answer is OBVIOUSLY in-flight refuelling.....


  • Options
    #14
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    therecklessone wrote:
    In the absence of you expanding on your brain wave, it seems your suggesting they sell off the AC's only airbase to buy fighters which will be based where?

    It's not their only airbase, they have helicoptor bases at Finner Camp in Donegal and Monaghan Camp.

    If they sold off Baldonnel, they could use the money to reopen Gormanston.

    But the city does not need a second airport, it need the first one to be properly developed.

    And the airfore does not need a fighter wing.


  • Options
    #15
    Hal1
    Registered Users Posts: 8,720 ✭✭✭Hal1


    It woulnd't work, using baldonnel as a 2nd terminal. The main reason could be that there is nowhere for that extra amount of traffic generated to go. That stretch of motorway along baldonnel is already well over capacity at peak times. And forget about diverting it back onto the N4 via the back roads.

    The right thing to do (If they really wanted to build a second terminal) would be to plan it away from Dublin, maybe Meath which should ease the burden abit.


  • Options
    #16
    therecklessone
    Registered Users Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    GerardKeating wrote:
    What's wrong with that.

    Place hasn't been used by the Air Corps in a number of years, they have officially withdrawn from the aerodrome and the runway has fallen into disrepair. The defence forces plan on selling it to finance their procurement programme, so I can't see them wishing to spend millions building a facility at EIGM to house modern jet fighters.

    IIRC the last time this was discussed on boards, the use of EIGM for civil operations was ruled out due to the proximity of the railway line, so I imagine that would work against it as a fighter base.
    GerardKeating wrote:
    Also, if they ever develop a Fighter wing, why does it even have to be in Dublin, a base somewhere in the Midlands, equidistance from Shannon and Dublin would be ideal, both need to be covered and flying time to either would not be that much.

    We don't need jet fighters.

    We could do with the AC moving out west (my suggestion was Knock) so they have less impact on civil ops at Dublin, releasing Baldonnel of use as a combined commuter/business aviation field (restrict to types such as ATRs, DH8C/Ds, BA46s and quieter biz jets etc)


  • Options
    #17
    therecklessone
    Registered Users Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    GerardKeating wrote:
    It's not their only airbase, they have helicoptor bases at Finner Camp in Donegal and Monaghan Camp.

    Moot point, neither are capable of handling high speed fixed-wings.


  • Options
    #18
    dermot_sheehan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭dermot_sheehan


    It makes no sense to invest in a whole new airport at Baldonnel, far better to invest in a new runway and terminals at the existing location and put a rail link in to the city centre to reduce traffic congestion. For a lot of the current flight paths into Dublin airport approach is over uninhabited ocean and thinly populated areas of north dublin. Far less people inconvenienced by noise then having routings for Baldonnel.


  • Options
    #19
    therecklessone
    Registered Users Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    Hal1 wrote:
    It woulnd't work, using baldonnel as a 2nd terminal. The main reason could be that there is nowhere for that extra amount of traffic generated to go. That stretch of motorway along baldonnel is already well over capacity at peak times. And forget about diverting it back onto the N4 via the back roads.

    You forget the fact that a sizable percentage of that traffic uses our motorway network to get to Dublin airport...


  • Options
    #20
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    therecklessone wrote:
    Moot point, neither are capable of handling high speed fixed-wings.

    Harrier's ?


  • Options
    #21
    therecklessone
    Registered Users Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    GerardKeating wrote:
    Harrier's ?

    I said high speed...;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users Posts: 3,242 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Can't see it ever being allowed due to serious safety and noise concerns.
    Now people who live near Dublin Aiport will have even more noise when the new terminals and runways open, causing more planes fly over their heads.

    The vast majority of people who have planes flying over their heads bought their house's long after the airport was built.


  • Options
    #23
    DublinWriter
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭DublinWriter


    gabhain7 wrote:
    It makes no sense to invest in a whole new airport at Baldonnel, far better to invest in a new runway and terminals at the existing location and put a rail link in to the city centre to reduce traffic congestion.
    Er hello? Big thumbs up to that then.

    The whole rail-link thing is a nonsence. Michael O'Leary came out several times on record stating that only 20% of people flying in London use public transport to get to/from their airport of choice.

    Even feckin' Belfast has two Airports and the CSO claim Dublin is going to grow at least 100% in the next 10 years.

    Having *one* airport stuck out in the Styx of North Dublin is not an option anymore guys.

    But as a poster stated, it's Harney's constituency, hence NIMBYism and the usual arse of Irish Parish-Pump politics.

    Still, she can always call upon her new technique of bursting into tears when questioned about difficult issues to dig her out of a hole.


  • Options
    #24
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    DublinWriter wrote:
    The whole rail-link thing is a nonsence. Michael O'Leary came out several times on record stating that only 20% of people flying in London use public transport to get to/from their airport of choice.

    And yet the tube is crowded at Heathrow most of the day.


  • Options
    #25
    therecklessone
    Registered Users Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    DublinWriter wrote:
    The whole rail-link thing is a nonsence. Michael O'Leary came out several times on record stating that only 20% of people flying in London use public transport to get to/from their airport of choice.

    Wish he'd tell his cabin crew, they might stop their annoyingly-loud PAs selling Stansted Express tickets...
    Even feckin' Belfast has two Airports and the CSO claim Dublin is going to grow at least 100% in the next 10 years.

    Stockholm has 4, similar population to Dublin. Though 3 are out in the "styx" (aka my home, cheeky bugger).


  • Options
    #26
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    DublinWriter wrote:
    Having *one* airport stuck out in the Styx of North Dublin is not an option anymore guys.

    But the existing Airport is closer to the City Centre than Baldonnel.

    Compaired to the main London airports, Dublin is practically in the city centre.

    The main problem with Dublin Airport is terminal space and Baldonnel does not have a terminal, so it's no help.


  • Options
    #27
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users Posts: 3,242 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Even feckin' Belfast has two Airports and the CSO claim Dublin is going to grow at least 100% in the next 10 years.

    Having *one* airport stuck out in the Styx of North Dublin is not an option anymore guys.

    Dublin Airport working with 2 runways at maximium capicity should easily be able to cope with even the most optimistic traffic growth projections for the foreseeable future.

    And that 20% statistic seems low, as the Stanstead Express that I was on last week was fairly packed.


  • Options
    #28
    DublinWriter
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭DublinWriter


    GerardKeating wrote:
    The main problem with Dublin Airport is terminal space and Baldonnel does not have a terminal, so it's no help.
    Well that's a typical Irish answer to an Irish question.

    ...you feckin' BUILD a terminal!


  • Options
    #29
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    DublinWriter wrote:
    Well that's a typical Irish answer to an Irish question.

    ...you feckin' BUILD a terminal!

    Yes, but Build it at the existing Airport...


  • Options
    #30
    weehamster
    Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭weehamster


    QUOTE=jackofalltrades]Can't see it ever being allowed due to serious safety and noise concerns.

    The vast majority of people who have planes flying over their heads bought their house's long after the airport was built.[/QUOTE]

    That’s a stupid statement considering the Dublin Airport started in 1940.:mad: By the way Baldonnel had first been used as an airport for Aer Lingus in 1936. The same argument can be put to locals around there. Why should people endure more noise and others hardly any at all? Because Mary Harney says so and therefore good people in Dublin Mid West can have a good night sleep? Feck That.

    My home is in Artane which my parent’s originally bought. It is on a flight path and the planes go over my house which was built in 1959. My parents knew the airport was there as well as thousands of others, but how in the hell would they have known the air traffic levels would be at the level it is now. Come on. Think first before you come out with a statement like the one above. :rolleyes:

    I have planes flying over at 1am. It can be really annoying at times. And for what, so people living around Baldonnell can go on their holidays to Costa del Bucket & Spade and then come back to the quiet homes.

    It will be bad when the Terminal 2 and the expansion is completed. If terminal 3 is built, the entire village of St Margarets will pulled down, as well as dramatically increasing the air traffic on top of Terminal 1 & 2. More traffic = more noise. :mad: Why not build it at Baldonnell. It was the original choice, proposals were drawn out and it has the lands for a new terminal.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Ste.phen
    Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭Ste.phen


    jackofalltrades wrote:
    Can't see it ever being allowed due to serious safety and noise concerns.



    The vast majority of people who have planes flying over their heads bought their house's long after the airport was built.

    I live very close to one of the main flight paths (actually, there's a plane going overhead right now) and after a while you simply stop noticing.

    Remember folks, fear change! :)


Advertisement