[Article] New Dublin airport body to seek €130m runway

thejollyrodger

New Dublin airport body to seek €130m runway

19/09/04 00:00

planeBy Gavin Daly
The new Dublin Airport Authority will apply for planning permission for a €130 million parallel runway before the end of the year.
The authority, which is due to replace Aer Rianta next month, is consulting local groups in north Dublin about the runway, which could take ten years to develop.

Robert Hilliard, a director of Aer Rianta, said the planning application would be submitted to Fingal County Council ``very shortly''.

Aer Rianta owns all the land required for the runway, which has been in the Fingal county development plan since 1972.


However, Hilliard said the planning process could take two years and would ``almost certainly'' be a matter for An Bord Pleanala.

The proposed runway will be 3 kilometres long,45 metres wide and run parallel to the main runway at Dublin Airport, Runway 1028.

``Additional capacity will be needed at the airport within ten years, and the parallel runway in the only viable option,'' Hilliard said.

He told The Sunday Business Post that capacity at the airport's two smaller runways would be restricted while the new runway was being built.

The new runway will be unable to handle regular landings by super jumbo aircraft being built by Airbus and Boeing.

Such aircraft would require a 60-metre-wide runway, which would mean ``enormous extra investment'', Hilliard said.

He said there was no indication that the super jumbos, which will seat more than 550 people, would use Dublin Airport regularly.

Jerry Kiersey of the Transport Umbrella Group said it was simply unsustainable to develop a runway that did not cater for the future.

Meanwhile, last Friday the new Shannon Airport Authority announced that it will reduce its airport charges to become a ``low-cost model'' in an effort to attract airlines and increase the volume of flights.

Patrick Shanahan, chairman of the authority, said informal talks had taken place with several airlines, including Ryanair, but no deal had yet been done.
http://www.sbpost.ie/web/DocumentView/did-124060915-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper-2FNews-2FIreland.asp

.

thejollyrodger

here we go again. This time they are building a new runway thats too small :rolleyes: The new runway should be 60 metres wide.

BuffyBot

Such aircraft would require a 60-metre-wide runway, which would mean ``enormous extra investment'', Hilliard said.

He said there was no indication that the super jumbos, which will seat more than 550 people, would use Dublin Airport regularly.

Possibly not, but who is to tell what the future would bring. And god knows, we wouldn't want to be planning for it!

Apart from anything else, assuming Shannon cannot handle them, what would happen in an emergency situation - "Sorry mate, I know you're on fire/have a bomb on board/are being hijacked but your plane is too big...do ya think you could possibly make it to Stanstead? There's a good pilot!"

thejollyrodger

well at least they can leave a green verge at the end to accomadate the extra 15 metres (like the m1) so they can upgrade the runway at a later date

Victor

You can't just add the extra 15 metres, just like that. A 60m runway needs to be substantially thicker than a 45m one, as the centre of the runway takes the greatest weight.

Tom Dunne

True, Victor, but do you not think they should plan for the future?

Wouldn't it make more sense to design/build it bigger now that attempt a half-arsed expansion in 10 years time?

Typical lack of foresight.

dowlingm

For a 380, you need a load well in excess of a 744 or 773. Can't see the requirement excepting perhaps 380F, since the trend is towards more point to point rather than funnelling everyone into JFK and onwards to DUB.

Length is important, not width - it must be able to take a fully laden 744, 773, 343/345/346HGW which are going to be in much wider circulation than 380, which will serve the likes of NRT, HKG, SIN and other long range hubs.

jbkenn

The new Dublin Airport Authority will apply for planning permission for a €130 million parallel runway before the end of the year.

Aer Rianta owns all the land required for the runway, which has been in the Fingal county development plan since 1972.

The proposed runway will be 3 kilometres long,45 metres wide and run parallel to the main runway at Dublin Airport, Runway 1028.

Just wondering, they plan to build a runway, approximately the same size, at Tucson Airport in Arizona, and they estimate the cost at $50 million or Euro41 million, and, they have to buy 225 acres of land.
Do we know the price of anything in this country?

jbkenn

dmeehan

i'd imagine that land in the arizona desert would be a bit cheaper than north county dublin

therecklessone

dmeehan wrote:

i'd imagine that land in the arizona desert would be a bit cheaper than north county dublin

Yes, but his point was tha Aer Rianta own the land already. Cheap Arizona land will always be beaten by already-owned land in north county.

Victor

There may also be the matters of layout, how level the existing ground is, the amount of security needed, other infrastructure, compensation to residents (for soundproofing of homes, etc.) and factors like the Irish construction industry being in excessive demand.

robbie1876

10 minutes phoning around from the 'Tarmacaddam Contractors' section of the Golden Pages and I bet you get get a better quote. You'd probably get some cobblelocking for your gaff thrown in for free too.

Seriously though, I was wondering on which side of the existing runway they are plannning to build it on. Surely it can't be one the southside, there couldn't be enough room there to build it unless they took over that little road where all the plane spotters hang out. In which case there would be considerable expense, and that helicoptor company would have to relocated. If it was on the northside, closer to the terminus, that will obviously run over one of the other runways, causing it's own difficulties and expense. Either way seems daunting to me. Anyone know for sure?

Robbie

therecklessone

robbie1876 wrote:

Seriously though, I was wondering on which side of the existing runway they are plannning to build it on. Surely it can't be one the southside, there couldn't be enough room there to build it unless they took over that little road where all the plane spotters hang out. In which case there would be considerable expense, and that helicoptor company would have to relocated. If it was on the northside, closer to the terminus, that will obviously run over one of the other runways, causing it's own difficulties and expense. Either way seems daunting to me. Anyone know for sure?

Robbie

It will be on the northside of the existing runway 10/28.

The plan is to replace the almost parallel short runway 11/29 (in effect straigthening and extending it).

Victor

robbie1876 wrote:

10 minutes phoning around from the 'Tarmacaddam Contractors' section of the Golden Pages and I bet you get get a better quote.

Yes, but use tarmacadam on a runway and you'll end up with rutting on the first day.

therecklessone

Victor, do you have a link to the plans of the parallel runway that Aer Rianta had on their site a while ago. I can't find anything with Google.

luckat

Rutting on the runway? Hmm. Sounds like a classic of the punk era.

Victor

therecklessone wrote:

Victor, do you have a link to the plans of the parallel runway that Aer Rianta had on their site a while ago. I can't find anything with Google.

I've only seen the Fingal CoCo map, essentially it is parallel to 10/28 and roughly in the location of 11/29, which I think would become longterm storage.

Something like the attached.

Putting the two runways together would mean comprimising capacity and need "fast" taxiways.

therecklessone

Victor wrote:

Putting the two runways together would mean comprimising capacity and need "fast" taxiways.

Which two? The existing 10/28 and a parallel, or the parallel and 11/29?

Victor

therecklessone wrote:

Which two? The existing 10/28 and a parallel, or the parallel and 11/29?

Sorry, I mean if you were putting 10/28 right next to 10/28 left without the terminal in between.

Gran Canaria (Palma?) has runway right and runway left right next to each other (land restrictions - they are only 200-300m apart at most), so while you can have simulataneous take-off and landings with individual aircraft, you can't have it with multiple aircraft. So commercial aircraft on the waterside runway (air force base) when they land they have to do a fast taxi (45 degree turn not 90 degree) to the terminal to clear the landside runway. And vice versa with air force planes.

therecklessone

Victor wrote:

Sorry, I mean if you were putting 10/28 right next to 10/28 left without the terminal in between.

Gran Canaria (Palma?) has runway right and runway left right next to each other (land restrictions - they are only 200-300m apart at most), so while you can have simulataneous take-off and landings with individual aircraft, you can't have it with multiple aircraft. So commercial aircraft on the waterside runway (air force base) when they land they have to do a fast taxi (45 degree turn not 90 degree) to the terminal to clear the landside runway. And vice versa with air force planes.

Cheers for clearing that up, I was very confused when you said it first. Might have been the late hour...

thejollyrodger

Dublin airport able to take 'super jumbo'

17/10/04 00:00

By Niamh Connolly

http://www.sbpost.ie/web/DocumentView/did-823364349-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper-2FNews.asp


The proposed €130 million runway at Dublin Airport will be able to handle so-called 'super jumbo' aircraft, after the Dublin Airport Authority changed its plans to allow for a wider runway.

The new plan allows for a 60-metre-wide runway, rather than the 45 metre width outlined by the authority in a draft plan last month. Robert Hilliard, director of the authority, said the change was made after a review in recent weeks which included extensive consultation with airlines.

The plan for a 45-metrewide runway had drawn criticism from the Transport Umbrella Group because it would not be able to handle so-called super jumbo aircraft, such as theAirbusA380.

"It's a more sensible approach to have the space for these planes," Hilliard said this weekend.

Last month, he told The Sunday Business Post that a 60 metre wide runway was unnecessary and would require "enormous extra investment''.

However, a spokesman for the authority said this weekend that the change would cost less than €10 million. The authority's U-turn means both of Dublin Airport's runways will be able to handle next-generation, long-haul aircraft which will seat more than 550 passengers.

Tadhg Kearney, the chairman of the Air Transport Users Council, said the decision to apply for a 60 metre wide runway was wise.

He said it meant "maximising the options for Dublin Airport over the next 20 years, both in terms of the design of the aircraft and changes in the regulatory environment''.

However, north Dublin residents who oppose the runway plan are unlikely to welcome a facility for larger aircraft.

The new runway will be 3.1 kilometres long, allowing Dublin to compete with Shannon on transatlantic routes.

The government's existing agreement to protect Shannon Airport's stopover status has restricted the length of runway at Dublin Airport to 2.637 kilometres. This has limited the capacity of certain aircraft to fly transatlantic routes from Dublin fully laden with cargo.

However, a liberalised airline market between the US and the EU is likely to be in operation when the new runway is completed in 2014.

Dublin Airport's capacity to handle aircraft will be cut while the new runway is being built across the top of the existing second runway.

The authority spokesman said work would be done on a phased basis, so capacity would only be affected during off-peak periods such as the winter months.

.

thejollyrodger

Only €10 million extra to handle the super jumbos, great news.

At least this is something that the country wont have to re-vist when the runway is finished. Thank god !!

ishmael whale

Finally a more sensible approach is being taken, gradually overcoming one of the bear traps laid for Dublin in the name of regional development.

http://www.sbpost.ie/web/DocumentVi...aper-2FNews.asp
…… The new runway will be 3.1 kilometres long, allowing Dublin to compete with Shannon on transatlantic routes.

The government's existing agreement to protect Shannon Airport's stopover status has restricted the length of runway at Dublin Airport to 2.637 kilometres. This has limited the capacity of certain aircraft to fly transatlantic routes from Dublin fully laden with cargo…..

Victor

thejollyrodger wrote:

Only €10 million extra to handle the super jumbos, great news.

Not quite. The intial guess for runway to specification X was €130m. On thinking things through specification Y is €140m. The two do not necessarily relate.

thejollyrodger

well put it like this. Dublin can now land super jumbos at the middle of the next decade.

I thought they would have to wait till they finished this project in 2014 then realise they need to expand again. Dig it all up again, then expand it to Jumbo size.

I was more happy with the fact that super jumbos can land that the modest price.

dowlingm

Extending the runway to 60m wide is not enough to accommodate A380. Stands must be wide enough and deep enough and taxiways and stands will have to be reinforced to take the additional weight, as is having to be done at Sydney, LAX, Frankfurt etc. This will cost a lot more than E10m - but it would cost even more to retrofit the runway widening so good that the new 10/28 is 60m from day 1.

luckat

We should be building a westside airport instead - handier for people up from de country and handy to the Luas, M50, trains and other delights. Clondalkin International Airport!

narommy

luckat wrote:

We should be building a westside airport instead - handier for people up from de country and handy to the Luas, M50, trains and other delights. Clondalkin International Airport!

What a daft idea. :rolleyes:

Building a huge airport at it's current location might make it economically feasible to put a metro line out to it for one thing.

sliabh

narommy wrote:

What a daft idea. :rolleyes:

Building a huge airport at it's current location might make it economically feasible to put a metro line out to it for one thing.

The current airport gets 12m people a year. That's over 30,000 a day when you average it out. There are few Dublin suburbs with that volume of travellers so it it's not economic now it never will be. And what's more if it's not economic to run a rail link to the airport then there is no where else in the city/suburbs that will be economic either.

therecklessone

sliabh wrote:

The current airport gets 12m people a year. That's over 30,000 a day when you average it out. There are few Dublin suburbs with that volume of travellers so it it's not economic now it never will be. And what's more if it's not economic to run a rail link to the airport then there is no where else in the city/suburbs that will be economic either.

Need to do your sums again mate:

2002 Dublin passenger numbers - almost 15.1 million

2003 Dublin passenger numbers - 15.9 million

Projected increase 2002-2017 - from 15 million to 30 million

And none of that takes account of staff numbers, meeters and greeters etc...

thejollyrodger

Extending the runway to 60m wide is not enough to accommodate A380.

The article says that the Dublin Airport will be able to handle super jumbos.

To be able to hand Super Jumbos (the biggest plane expected in the next decade) obviously that means everything from landing to taxiing to the terminal to taking off again.

Thats good enough for me..

sliabh

therecklessone wrote:

Need to do your sums again mate:

2002 Dublin passenger numbers - almost 15.1 million
2003 Dublin passenger numbers - 15.9 million
Projected increase 2002-2017 - from 15 million to 30 million
And none of that takes account of staff numbers, meeters and greeters etc...

I stand fully corrected

I was being lazy when googling and didn't check the figures were the most current.

So that makes it 43,000+ per day. It seems to me there is a desperate need there for a new rail link.

narommy

Just in case I am mis understood.

I fully support the buildinig of a metro link to the airport. It's sad that we don't have one. I was just pointing out that numbers to make it economic are one think that is always thrown up as a reason not to build it. Splitting up the people between two airports is not a good idea

Also I doubt that all 43,000 people would use it when it is built.

btw Dublin west would suit me best

thejollyrodger

I forgot about the metro. That should defintely go ahead with the new runway and expected new terminal. Dublin Airport looks set for a massive increase in passenger numbers.

A metro from swords, airport to city centre would really set up the transport in that area for the 21st century. Splitting passengers into two airports just means doubling infastructure. Thats fine if your a big country like the U.K or Germany. Not pratical for the likes of Dublin.

dowlingm

Jolly

you have a charming and touching faith in the accuracy of journos who call aircraft a "super jumbo"

Victor

O_o

Found this with maps and photos http://www.dublinairport.ie/AR_Dublin/Live/Lv_pres_GenTemplate.asp?strPage_Name=DN_Rmessage

Does it make sense that aircraft taking off heading west (into the prevailing wind) do so from the north runway, so as to minimize noise disturbance in Portmarknock?

A Dub in Glasgo

The resolution on these OS images are dreadful

therecklessone

Victor wrote:

Does it make sense that aircraft taking off heading west (into the prevailing wind) do so from the north runway, so as to minimize noise disturbance in Portmarknock?

No. The choice of which runway will be used for departures shouldbe based on runway length. The new runway (for westerly departures 28R) will be longer, as stated:

The length of the proposed runway is 3110m. This length is based on consultation with the users and with minimising the impact of the construction on the surrounding road network. The length is derived from Runway Take-off Distance Required for an A330-200/300. The length of the existing main runway is 2637m.

Eastbound departures should do the same, i.e. use the new runway (in this case 10L). However, this being Ireland, no doubt the residents of Portmarnock will kick up a fuss and DAA will be forced to use the new runway for arrivals with the odd heavy jet departure thrown in.

EvilDoctorK

Presumably yes Victor... a compromise whereby the new northerly runway is not used for departures/arrivals over Portmarnock would be the sensible thing

Subject as is mentioned by therecklessone for the few departures per day that would require the longer runway on those occasional days with Easterly operations. (but realistically this would only be a few flights a day and at a guesstimate only 25% of the time would operations be in an easterly direction). Thus it could be said to the residents of Portmarnock that it would only involve a few hundred flights per year departing overhead portmarnock (arriving aircraft are not an issue as runway length to my understanding isn't an issue for arrivals except perhaps in emergency circumstances)

I believe a similar compromise was reached at Heathrow with the local residents. When departures to the East are in force at Heathrow (again relativley rarely due to the wind) then the southern runway is always used for departures and for the more normal Westerly operations - during the afternoon the runways are "swapped" (so the built up areas to the east aren't constantly overflown all day by arriving traffic)

Lennoxschips

Just to give an idea:

Amsterdam Schiphol's newest runway is 3800 x 60 metres. The underlying ground is a former marsh, as with all of the Noord-Holland/Amsterdam area.

It cost 340 million euros, including the cost of the land and a new radar tower.

Stands must be wide enough and deep enough and taxiways and stands will have to be reinforced to take the additional weight.

The A380 leaves a lighter footprint than a B747, because it has more wheels spread over a larger area. The Airbus engineers made sure that B747 capable taxiways would also be able to handle the A380. You're right about widening the gates though. The A380 will probably be nearly as big as the terminal building.

jlang

I don't think scheduled passenger A380s will ever get to Dublin. The plane is just not designed for the types of flights that airlines would want to put on from Dublin. Hopefully we will see long distance A350s or the like, but A380s (and, in truth, probably B747s as well) will only get here for exceptional visits. What could happen is a freight A380 service or an occasional special passenger charter or possibly Dublin being an emergency landing location for a distressed Heathrow bound A380. There's no need to upgrade the at-terminal stands for these purposes, only that a large/strong enough area of tarmac can be made available. The existing B pier can take B747s already, so a future modification of one of the 747 stands should be enough if that it turns out to be regularly required.

The priority of any new terminal or terminal upgrade should be to supply as many 737 or A320 size stands as possible so that as many medium range destinations can be served as possible without having to go to hub airports. And I for one can't wait for the new runway and terminal as I'm sick of transitting through Stansted. Please Michael O'Leary: "get off your high horse with the government and serve a few more locations from your HQ airport."

Victor

There is position slated for an island terminal, north west of the existing terminal.