Dublin Airport - Terminal 2

greyed

The DAA have released more information including pictures of shiny new T2
Pictures here
Fact Sheet

New Terminal to Transform Dublin Airport

The Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) is to build a new €395m terminal at Dublin Airport capable of handling up to 15 million passengers per year.

Construction of T2 is due to begin in the second quarter of next year and the new terminal will open in the Autumn of 2009. T2 will transform the passenger experience for travellers using Dublin Airport and raise capacity at the airport to a potential 35 million passengers per year.

“T2 will provide an elegant and contemporary gateway for 21st century Ireland,” said DAA chairman Gary McGann. “It provides a cost effective solution to Dublin Airport’s current capacity deficit that meets the Government’s requirement for delivery by 2009 and it represents a further significant milestone for the DAA in its commitment to deliver on its key shareholder and customer objectives.”
T2 will be a bright, modern building designed specifically to meet travellers’ needs. It will feature large airy spaces in areas such as check-in, baggage reclaim, security and the departures lounge. The 75,000 square metre terminal will also have dedicated facilities to meet the needs of business travellers and families travelling with young children. The public areas will create a calm and relaxing environment for arriving and departing passengers alike.
The planning application for T2 will be lodged this week with Fingal County Council together with a planning application for a new pier building (Pier E), an improved internal road network, a major utilities upgrade and a range of other associated works. The total cost, at current prices, of the terminal and the other new infrastructure for which planning permission is being sought is just over €600m.

T2 will be built close to the roundabout on the existing approach road to Terminal One. As part of the plan for T2, the internal roads at Dublin Airport will be upgraded and reconfigured to create separate dedicated approach routes for T1 and T2. Locations for a future Metro station and a ground transportation centre are also provided in the development plan.

T2 is a three-storey, curvilinear building that sits astride the main access road to Terminal One. The building has two main components - a check-in area and a departures and arrivals area – connected by a link that forms part of the central spine of the new building. The way in which T2 sits astride the road means that all arriving vehicular traffic for the existing passenger terminal will pass under this link on its way to T1.

In the spacious new check-in area passengers will find almost 60 traditional check-in desks and ample self-service kiosks and self-serve bag drop positions. Having passed through a centralised security area, they will enter a large departures lounge with retail and catering outlets providing views over the airfield. Passengers will then continue onto the boarding gates in the new Pier E to board their aircraft.

The new facilities allow arriving passengers move from gate to landside through the centre of the terminal without a change in levels. Another feature of T2’s design is that all passengers will pass through the heart of the building whether they are departing or arriving.

Aer Lingus is expected to be the primary user of T2 and the new terminal will also be home to other transatlantic and intercontinental carriers. The new 24,000 square metre Pier E facility, which is perpendicular to T2, will have gates for up to 19 short-haul aircraft or up to eight long-haul aircraft.

DAA chief executive Declan Collier said that while T2 would open in 2009, passengers using Dublin Airport would begin to see improvements in facilities from later this year. Work is currently underway on Area 14, a new lower ground floor check-in area in T1 that will open this December. The construction of Pier D, which will open in Autumn 2007, is also progressing and it will create a vibrant new departures area with 14 new gates for fast turnaround short-haul aircraft.

“We are acting to deliver new capacity at Dublin Airport to meet the needs of the travelling public and our airline partners,” he added. “In recent years, the facilities at Dublin have not kept pace with the huge growth in passenger numbers. But with the advent of T2, Pier E and our plan to upgrade the entire airport campus, we will deliver a high-quality, cost-effective, contemporary gateway for Irish air travellers and visitors to this country alike. In this context we welcome the fact that the cost-effective basis of the plans we announce today, will be affirmed by the independent cost verification consultants appointed by the Government.”

He added that the plans for T2 and Pier E are key elements of a major Airport Development Programme at Dublin Airport that also includes a new parallel runway, an extension to the existing Terminal One facility and a range of other upgrades and improvements due to be delivered over the next 10 years.

The design and specification of T2 and its associated infrastructure has been developed following a detailed consultation process with the airlines and other key stakeholders at Dublin Airport. This process revealed significantly more aggressive growth plans on the part of the principal airlines based at the Airport than had been anticipated when the DAA published its initial draft airport development plans a year ago.

“Our commitment to addressing the requirements of all our airline customers, service providers and passengers as effectively as possible, has led to a significant increase in the scope of our initial development plan and an acceleration in the delivery of some key supporting infrastructure,” said Declan Collier.

“To deliver the plans we announce today and the other essential infrastructure required, the DAA’s longer-term development plan for Dublin Airport will exceed the €1.2bn outlined in last year’s initial projections. We are currently engaged with the Regulator and other stakeholders with regard to the detail of this future investment.”

T2 has been designed by a project team comprising Arup, Pascall + Watson and Mace. The consortium was appointed as project manager and designer for T2, Pier E and all associated integration works earlier this year. The firms have previously worked on other major airport projects such as Heathrow’s Terminal 5, Beijing’s new Terminal 3, Hong Kong’s Chek Lap Kok International Airport and Seeb International Airport in Oman.

Ends
Issued 30th August 2006

bryanw

OMFG - that thing is magnificent... it looks beautiful!

Just a question... has anything changed from when the new terminal was originally announced?

btw, are the airlines featured in the pictures a hint at which airlines will be moved to the new termainal...?

markf909

http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/images/Route_departures.jpg

I love the in-joke here for people who have had to put up Aer Lingus' traditional transatlantic fare

steve-o

So shiny new Pier C gets whacked. That was £50 million well spent.

markf909

steve-o wrote:

So shiny new Pier C gets whacked. That was £50 million well spent.

Which makes one wonder where all the flights from Pier C will go whilst T2 is under construction.

secret_squirrel

steve-o wrote:

So shiny new Pier C gets whacked. That was £50 million well spent.

Thats what I dont understand, where's the logic in destroying all/most of pier C?

How can that be a good use of money?

And ditto on where the A/C will go in the mean time.

What I want to know is the Net Addition of Gates after pier C is removed and Pier E completed?

IF that picuture is accurate then there are 18 gates on Pier E. There are about 10ish? on Pier C currently.

Therefore for the money you get 8ish new gates for A/C.

How does that help provide for expansion? Do DAA expect everyone to go for a 25min turnaround???

Wishbone Ash

What's the story with Corballis House? I presume it's listed? Will it be removed elsewhere or demolished? :eek:

Flukey

The talk earlier in the year was to take it down, brick by brick, and put it up again. It is a pity that they have to do that and could do not design things so it could be left there with clearance room around it. As to the rest of the development, don't hold your breath.

Wishbone Ash

Flukey wrote:

brick by brick,

Thanks for that. I doubt if it was built with brick. I'd imagine stone mixed with mortar (or whatever they used then) would be very difficult to transfer!

saobh_ie

bryanw wrote:

Just a question... has anything changed from when the new terminal was originally announced?

Well, its already 25,000 square feet bigger... 75,000 instead of 50,000. But given that they're putting 90,000 people through the building a day I suppose thats warranted. I probaly would have gone bigger again 100,000 square feet but I guess that's what the proposed extension to the main terminal building (soon to be called terminal 1) will do.

I think it looks quite good. A proper modern international airport. As for Pier C and Corballis house, snails on the M50 and all things of that sort. Stuff like that shouldn't stand in the way of deflivering essential infastructure when cost and practical issues means that there is no alternative.

Also with the Old Central Terminal Building will presumably look classy from the sky bridge to Pier B from Terminal 1.

Anyway, now we've got to ask. What to build and where when all of this Dublin airport stuff is done? New Terminal, New Piers, Terminal Extensions, Pier Redevelopments, Runways.

Occidental

bryanw wrote:

btw, are the airlines featured in the pictures a hint at which airlines will be moved to the new termainal...?

It's planned to stick most of the widebody and transatlantic traffic through the new terminal.

One thing which should be noted. Before and after the new terminal is built, the amount of aircraft stands stays virtually the same. The only thing changing is the amount of stands with airbridges. Given the current congestion and frequent wait for vacant stands, I find this somewhat worrying. DAA have also yet to point out where all the cargo aircraft are going to go. Maybe they have a cunning plan.

jlang

Is it not a security risk when the new terminal "sits astride the main access road to Terminal One".

Maskhadov

Wishbone Ash wrote:

Thanks for that. I doubt if it was built with brick. I'd imagine stone mixed with mortar (or whatever they used then) would be very difficult to transfer!

Why dont they do what do they do in the states. Get in those contractors that put can lift the house up in one go and then simply move it somewhere else.

I cant wait to see Dublin Airport when its all finished. Its a diaster at the moment but the new terminal looks great

Bluetonic

jlang wrote:

Is it not a security risk when the new terminal "sits astride the main access road to Terminal One".

Exactly how?

bringitdown

Call me a cynic but in summary:

Pier C, built at a cost of €50mil or so gets whacked.
New terminal built WILL be over budget and late.
New terminal will not look like the mockups but will be built like a brick sh1thouse - such is our attitude to architecture in Ireland.
Major distruption to airport approach traffic.

jjbrien

I would really wonder where the airlines who use pier c will go. I know from working at the aiport that 3 of the airlines who use pier c will only uses airbridges. they refuse to use steps. They will proberly stop flying to Dublin until the new termial is bulit. These airlines provide most of the business that goes trough pier c. DAA could loose alot if money if they pull out.

ircoha

saobh_ie wrote:

Well, its already 25,000 square feet bigger... 75,000 instead of 50,000. But given that they're putting 90,000 people through the building a day I suppose thats warranted. I probaly would have gone bigger again 100,000 square feet but I guess that's what the proposed extension to the main terminal building (soon to be called terminal 1) will do.

I think it looks quite good. A proper modern international airport. As for Pier C and Corballis house, snails on the M50 and all things of that sort. Stuff like that shouldn't stand in the way of deflivering essential infastructure when cost and practical issues means that there is no alternative.

Also with the Old Central Terminal Building will presumably look classy from the sky bridge to Pier B from Terminal 1.

Anyway, now we've got to ask. What to build and where when all of this Dublin airport stuff is done? New Terminal, New Piers, Terminal Extensions, Pier Redevelopments, Runways.

All areas are in square meters:)

saobh_ie

steve-o wrote:

So shiny new Pier C gets whacked. That was £50 million well spent.

Less than a third of it gets taken down. The rest remains intact looking at one of the drawings posted online and will most likley operate normally for the duration of the building works and beyond.

Edit: Half of it gets taken down.

jlang wrote:

Is it not a security risk when the new terminal "sits astride the main access road to Terminal One".

No more than having the roads go near the building.

bringitdown wrote:

Call me a cynic but in summary:
New terminal built WILL be over budget and late.

It will be reported as over budget as it appears that the papers have published the price for the building. When hit gets stuffed full of Baggage Handling/Screening equipment and the IT systems an airport needs it'll cost more.

It will be delayed in planning and in the appeals process.

Pier C as it stands has 6 airbridge served gates, Pier E from Terminal two will have 18 from the looks of things but only for commuter traffic, like what currently uses pier C.

ircoha wrote:

All areas are in square meters:)

Yeah. I knew when I was writing square feet it was stupid. But I of course though, it was them being stupid and not I. =]

15,000 m2 phase 2 extension is planned for to Terminal 2.

Doesn't appear to be a lot of thought put into the carpark building opposite though, not much point in building a bueatiful terminal building if they put a large concrete box opposing it.

Winters

Typically the authority in charge of Dublin Airport has continued with their ad hoc-ism development of the entire Dublin Airport site. Their sustained plan to shove everyone and everything into a corner of the 'horseshoe area' without a long term campus master plan in place defies logic.

International norm in places like Berlin (BBI), Munich, Hong Kong, Heathrow and other parallel runway airports has advanced from the traditional set up to the more modern service optimising layout of terminals and piers between and perpendicular to the two runways.

darkman2

I like the design. Makes the new Cork Terminal look like a Garden shed by comparison. As long as they build it on time I think its great. The reorganisation of the roads has been needed for years:)

secret_squirrel

The mind boggles to me, Concentrating all the traffic for T1 through T2, with everyone blocking the access by dropping off the world and their wife.

I cant believe they couldnt find a less conjested site, such as over by the older hangers, maybe knocking a couple down. A replacement hangar costs peanuts, they could also work out some kind of seperate approach road to mitigate traffic.

darkman2

secret_squirrel wrote:

The mind boggles to me, Concentrating all the traffic for T1 through T2, with everyone blocking the access by dropping off the world and their wife.

I cant believe they couldnt find a less conjested site, such as over by the older hangers, maybe knocking a couple down. A replacement hangar costs peanuts, they could also work out some kind of seperate approach road to mitigate traffic.

Looking at the model there are two seperate roads - 1 for T2 and the other passing under it to T1. Thats not a drop off point:)

Wishbone Ash

Maskhadov wrote:

Why dont they do what do they do in the states. Get in those contractors that put can lift the house up in one go and then simply move it somewhere else.

I cant wait to see Dublin Airport when its all finished. Its a diaster at the moment but the new terminal looks great

Here's a picture of Corballis House for those who may not be familiar with it.

spacetweek

Wishbone Ash wrote:

Here's a picture of Corballis House for those who may not be familiar with it.

Anyone know who lives there? How do they stand the noise??

Wishbone Ash

spacetweek wrote:

Anyone know who lives there? How do they stand the noise??

No one. It's used as offices by the DAA as far as I know. I presume it would have been the original house which went with the land that was purchased for the airport in the 1930s/40s but with the continuing expansion over the years , it has unfortunately become rather marooned.

Lennoxschips

so they're knocking half the new C-pier

that's so incredilbly stupid it's unbelievable

edit: what i'd to is incorporate the c-pier into terminal 2 (thus linking t1 and t2 airside for transfers), and then build a round satellite terminal on the tarmac, linked to terminal 2 via an underground people-mover link, which would allow room for the c-pier to continue to exist and be used in its entirety upon completion of t2

obviously they should have thought of this 15 years ago or whenever it was when they were planning the c-pier. no foresight, no masterplan

dowlingm

Lennoxchips

don't need a people mover. Pearson Toronto uses artic buses for the infield pier - works fairly well. They did install a people mover from Terminal 1 to the carpark which would be more suitable as a rollercoaster I believe rather than a means of transporting people with baggage.

Maskhadov

Corballis House is overated... also it looks a bizarre sight in its current location.

secret_squirrel

Lennoxschips wrote:

edit: what i'd to is incorporate the c-pier into terminal 2 (thus linking t1 and t2 airside for transfers), and then build a round satellite terminal on the tarmac, linked to terminal 2 via an underground people-mover link, which would allow room for the c-pier to continue to exist and be used in its entirety upon completion of t2

Munich is a great example of that kind of idea. From memory they have a number of isolated satellite terminals reached by people movers.

Another idea is similar to the new giant linking bridge they are building between 2 of the piers at Gatwick.

Wishbone Ash

Maskhadov wrote:

Corballis House is overated... also it looks a bizarre sight in its current location.

That's part of it's attraction - a country house, slap bang in the middle of an airport!

darkman2

There is video of the new terminal:

Here http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/images/departures_pt1.rm




Here http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/images/departures_pt2.rm





and Herehttp://www.dublinairportauthority.com/images/arrivals_web.rm

Sarsfield

darkman2 wrote:

There is video of the new terminal:

Here http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/images/departures_pt1.rm




Here http://www.dublinairportauthority.com/images/departures_pt2.rm





and Herehttp://www.dublinairportauthority.com/images/arrivals_web.rm

From the videos, I see WH Smith has the concession for the Departures area - Hughes&Hughes won't be best pleased.

And Aer Lingus seems to be flying Boeings again!

mackerski

secret_squirrel wrote:

Munich is a great example of that kind of idea. From memory they have a number of isolated satellite terminals reached by people movers.

They exist, but linked by buses (unless the new terminal has stuff I haven't seen yet). In years of using the airport, I've seen a satellite gate used exactly once (on my first landing there, oddly enough).

Dermot

dowlingm

I'd prefer to see T2 designed to eventually "eat" T1 (as Pearson "new" T1 is currently eating T2 and will eventually eat T3)

Instead there are going to be two or even three (or four if you count the old International) with the resultant crazy approach roads.

One terminal with ultimate capacity of 35-40m, along with an aviation policy which gets people where they want to go rather than making Dublin a Heathrow clone but which avoids forcing people through airports they don't want to go through like the current Shannon situation will be good for Dublin and good for the environment by avoiding unnecessary extra flights for Ireland bound pax.

murphaph

dowlingm wrote:

One terminal with ultimate capacity of 35-40m, along with an aviation policy which gets people where they want to go rather than making Dublin a Heathrow clone...

Such as that proposed by the McEvaddys? I really liked that Munich clone. Would have been perfect but I think they are worried about the metro's abilityto serve such a terminal. Nonsense IMO-they could have looked at other options. Of course, DAA would not have favoured it given that the McEvaddys own the land!

penexpers

One thing I like about the new terminal is the better layout of the checkin area. Checkin desks against the wall work alot better than the current system, imo.

Idbatterim

Good to see T2 got permission, but the working hours are limited to 65 hrs per week from what i understand? is this a wind up or a joke?! just when you thought we were starting to move forward here and sort things out! hopefully this and a few of the other ridiculous conditions will be overturned. Also noticed the fact that one of the articles said the airport had capacity for 60 million passenegers, which wont please the residents, but traffic will never reach that level according to the paper! given passenger numbers this year will be roughly 21.5 million, given Pier D, T2 etc etc etc, how long off is 60 million do you reckon? Id reckon 25 years off...

FlutterinBantam

15

jdivision

FlutterinBantam wrote:

15

It got permission but will be appealed to ABP

secret_squirrel

Indeed Ryan Air have already appealled to ABP.

Can't help thinking the €12.5m *cough*infrastructure charge*cough* to fingal CoCo may have helped grease the wheels......

Why is it good that it got permission? Its massively overpriced, badly placed and is going to lead to higher landing charges.

All the LCC's need is a shed to move their human cattle about it, not some gin palace.

greyed

secret_squirrel wrote:

All the LCC's need is a shed to move their human cattle about it, not some gin palace.

Like this?:rolleyes: I'll settle for our overpriced T2

secret_squirrel

greyed wrote:

Like this?:rolleyes: I'll settle for our overpriced T2

More fool you - whats wrong with it? 16m thats a tiny fraction of the price of T2

greyed

I dont believe quality of life should always suffer for economics... sure its important to make savings, cut costs here and there but that terminal is rediculous and to suggest that Ireland should settle for such in its current economic climate after years of deprivation is insulting. In terms of flying, the journey is not important but the destination, I understand, but I think a high quality terminal is well deserved and will add to the city. Terminal 2 has its flaws, but is immensely better than that "cattle shed". Simply put... its nice to have something shiny and new, why wreck that?

Lennoxschips

i don't thing terminal 2 is bang for the buck either. it involves knocking the existing "new" C pier and doesn't really add that many gates.

you could get a lot more for that money, and still have a really nice terminal.

secret_squirrel

greyed wrote:

I dont believe quality of life should always suffer for economics...

Quality of life - in an airport terminal - dont make me laugh!

If this was something groundbreaking like the terminal at KL I might agree with you, but its not. Its just a glorified shed, like most terminals. A €600m shed at that.

greyed wrote:

to suggest that Ireland should settle for such in its current economic climate after years of deprivation is insulting.

How has Dublin Airport been deprived? The current terminal does its job pretty well apart from the occasional ineptness of the GNIB and their passport control chaos. DAA even handled the ridiculouslly unecessary security clampdowns pretty well.

greyed wrote:

I think a high quality terminal is well deserved and will add to the city.

How exactly? Its not exactly an architechtural masterpiece is it?

greyed wrote:

Simply put... its nice to have something shiny and new, why wreck that?

Coz its going to cost every single traveller in terms of increased airport fees?

greyed

I am speaking in general terms here, if our city was run like ryanair then it would be a hole in the ground, a very successful one at that, but not very nice to live in.You have me wrong in that I completely agree that 600m is a joke, but so is what you get for 16. As for the logic behind knocking pier c, if there is any, it eludes me. Loads of mistakes... yeah, but finally alleviating crowded T1 to direct its passengers to an even lower grade DIY terminal... no.

I do like the design of T2 though, not exactly KL, but nice

Yoda

secret_squirrel wrote:

Quality of life - in an airport terminal - dont make me laugh!

Do you fly much? I have been in many airports where quality of life is actually present. Copenhagen (sauna!). Portland, Oregon. Tokyo Narita. Helsinki. Oslo. Tucson, Arizona.

The loveliest thing is that in all of those places your bags get delivered quickly and efficiently. Travel is nasty and upsetting. Getting the eff out of the airport... priceless.

dave2pvd

secret_squirrel wrote:

The current terminal does its job pretty well

You might want to expand your sample group size.

Slice

secret_squirrel
The current terminal does its job pretty well

I agree, few airports I've traveled through are especially pleasant and Dublin does not stand out as being particularly bad. It is exceptionally busy at times and that's the only problem with it really.

secret_squirrel

Yoda wrote:

Do you fly much? I have been in many airports where quality of life is actually present. Copenhagen (sauna!). Portland, Oregon. Tokyo Narita. Helsinki. Oslo. Tucson, Arizona.

I fly lots.:)

I agree they are all nice airports, its just that unless you actually work in one you really are only passing through and to use the phrase quality of life is a bit much!

I do think that they should make an effort to ensure passenger comfort in an airport, just not spend huge amounts of money on it.

dave2pvd

secret_squirrel wrote:

I fly lots.:)
to use the phrase quality of life is a bit much!......they should make an effort to ensure passenger comfort in an airport, just not spend huge amounts of money on it.

You're arguing semantics TBH. Why not substuitute in 'value for money', since afterall, you're paying to use the airport?

I've travelled a lot. Of all the '1st world' airports I've passed through, DA ranks close to rock bottom. And not just because of the hyped up security arrangements either. Layout, accessiblility, size, cleanliness, ignorant staff, the parking, poor public transport access, and on and on and on...

10 years ago it was starting to burst at the seams at peak demand. Now? Now it's a disincentive to air-travel.