Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
29-01-2014, 18:57   #1
Khuitlio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 12
Dublin Airport Development 2014

Hi just wondering if anyone has any idea whether we'll see plans for the following emerge this year:

Redeveloped pier A
Redeveloped pier B
New pier F

In DAAs strategy for 2010-2014 they state that €7million will be allocated for the planning of the above piers, so that as soon as the need arises for the new piers planning will already be in place. They reckon the piers will be need 2015-2019.

I've attached their masterplan, my sketch of it (as you can see I'm not artist!) and their summary of the development of the new piers.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg image.jpg (1.97 MB, 445 views)
File Type: jpg image.jpg (189.2 KB, 1120 views)
File Type: jpg image.jpg (230.2 KB, 286 views)
File Type: jpg image.jpg (271.3 KB, 274 views)
Khuitlio is offline  
Advertisement
29-01-2014, 20:56   #2
dubdaymo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 172
They seem to have completely left out one vital ingredient from the mixture. Anyone else care to guess what it is, LOL?.
dubdaymo is offline  
29-01-2014, 21:33   #3
IRLConor
Subscriber
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 3,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by dubdaymo View Post
They seem to have completely left out one vital ingredient from the mixture. Anyone else care to guess what it is, LOL?.
Cargo? Wouldn't pier F be built over the current cargo facilities at 411-414?
IRLConor is offline  
Thanks from:
29-01-2014, 21:50   #4
Khuitlio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by dubdaymo View Post
They seem to have completely left out one vital ingredient from the mixture. Anyone else care to guess what it is, LOL?.
Lack of ambition, foresight or money?
Khuitlio is offline  
29-01-2014, 22:14   #5
Irish Steve
Registered User
 
Irish Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Ashbourne Co Meath
Posts: 1,445
So many things missing

Cargo parking and ramp space to work on the aircraft, it's not just a box to put the aircraft in, a large cargo aircraft needs a lot of pallet dollies, and they don't stack vertically.

Space for all the other things that have to be put somewhere airside, like steps for the rear door, baggage containers, stuff like that.

General Aviation (biz jets etc) stands and access

Remote parking to put things on that are not needed for some while, like standby aircraft.

Usual DAA nonsense, the way they "extended" T1 from an operational aspect was a shambles, whoever designed it had never moved a suitcase or a container of bags in their life, and it was and is a total disaster to operate in a high volume environment, and if a special requirement flight like an Israeli aircraft is coming in, the whole thing becomes a nightmare because of the way that the baggage hall doesn't work.

The landside access is still the disastrous split level no brain nonsense of the set down road that's full of pedestrians so doesn't flow, and nowhere to do a quick pick up of passengers that have arrived,

Lack of imagination, lack of foresight, lack of awareness of what the customer wants.
Irish Steve is offline  
Advertisement
30-01-2014, 08:41   #6
dubdaymo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 172
Irish Steve has just about summed up the DAA in a few sentences. Total incompetence and a lack of any knowledge of how to run an airport. The omission I was referring to was the crosswind runway. The need to have one at DUB was never more demonstrated than in recent times.
dubdaymo is offline  
Thanks from:
30-01-2014, 09:18   #7
Dublinflyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 339
It's great that we have so many aviation experts in this country who are more than willing to offer their expertise to the daa. While building terminal 2 they were quick to point out that it was too big and not needed at the time but the daa went ahead and built anyway. Which is lucky as it is completely full with all the new routes running from Dublin over the summer. The same blind ignorance is leading them down the road of looking to plan for expansion again using current real estate resources but maybe their dumb luck will strike again.
Dublinflyer is online now  
30-01-2014, 14:04   #8
flanzer
Registered User
 
flanzer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: D. 13
Posts: 2,564
I see people are still reading and believing Michael O'Leary's Old testament.

Don't ya know he's turned the page, and is an all round nice guy now
flanzer is offline  
30-01-2014, 14:05   #9
CaptainSkidmark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Shannon, Co. Clare.
Posts: 1,095
What happened to Pier C?

If it went ahead as per the sketch they would have to re letter them, Its shocking.
CaptainSkidmark is offline  
Advertisement
30-01-2014, 14:10   #10
flanzer
Registered User
 
flanzer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: D. 13
Posts: 2,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainSkidmark View Post
What happened to Pier C?

If it went ahead as per the sketch they would have to re letter them, Its shocking.
That gets me onto the next point. How old is this document?? daa have renamed the Piers 1,2,3,4 now. A, B, D, E are a thing of the past

Last edited by flanzer; 30-01-2014 at 14:14.
flanzer is offline  
30-01-2014, 14:20   #11
Tenger
Moderator
 
Tenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Pale
Posts: 3,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by flanzer View Post
That gets me onto the next point. How old is this document?? daa have renamed the Piers 1,2,3,4 now. A, B, D, E are a thing of the past
The plan in the 2nd link above is at least 4-5 years old. I saw it around the time T2 was competed. It was part of a section entitled "Dublin Airport 2035".

Tenger is offline  
30-01-2014, 15:55   #12
Khuitlio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenger View Post
The plan in the 2nd link above is at least 4-5 years old. I saw it around the time T2 was competed. It was part of a section entitled "Dublin Airport 2035".

Wasn't actually aware that the piers had been renamed, it makes sense that they would do that though.

Although the document is from 2009, it was post crash so has factored this in surely?

The terminals are starting to get busier, and this summer they should definitely be very busy with all the new routes. Personally I think it would be a step in the right direction for them to begin planning airport expansion so that when need it will have a much shorter lead in time.

However I think that they should also be looking to get maximum efficiencies from the infrastructure they have at present before they begin expanding.

I agree that 'Pier F' is in an awful position and would require the cargo facilities to be moved, however I can't see a better alternative, ideally T2 wouldn't have been built where it is. I guess DAA now how to make the most of its location.
Khuitlio is offline  
30-01-2014, 16:17   #13
Jamie2k9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: EIDW
Posts: 2,719
Quote:
Wasn't actually aware that the piers had been renamed, it makes sense that they would do that though.
It does and it doesn't. Studies have shown that passengers find it easier to recognise gate numbers with a letter and a number instead of a number. D10 to 101. It may not be such an issue at DUB but at major international airports they have/are changing to letter/number style.
Jamie2k9 is offline  
30-01-2014, 16:44   #14
Dublinflyer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Steve View Post

The landside access is still the disastrous split level no brain nonsense of the set down road that's full of pedestrians so doesn't flow, and nowhere to do a quick pick up of passengers that have arrived,
The problem with having an area for "quick pickups" of passengers is that you get the five minute brigade taking it over and ending up sitting there for 20 minutes. It also leads to people stopping and waiting for a space to come free and clog up the approach road and that will delay everyone and is just dangerous.
Dublinflyer is online now  
(3) thanks from:
30-01-2014, 18:10   #15
urajoke
Closed Account
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dublinflyer View Post
The problem with having an area for "quick pickups" of passengers is that you get the five minute brigade taking it over and ending up sitting there for 20 minutes. It also leads to people stopping and waiting for a space to come free and clog up the approach road and that will delay everyone and is just dangerous.
I agree fully. Look at most car parks where parent and child and disabled spaces are used by people who have neither a child or a disabled person in the car, who consider those spaces are there purely for their convenience to run into the shop for "5mins".
urajoke is offline  
(4) thanks from:
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet