Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

Irish Steve

faoiarvok wrote: »

The tower and centre are outside the fence, but I agree, can't see public access happening. Most likely retained as a contingency tower.

Sounds to me like it would make the perfect training facility.

jmkennedyie

Hmmm. Die Hard 8?

JCX BXC

I hope the snow team are being prepped!

Jamie2k9

HTCOne wrote: »

Depends on traffic flows, when there’s a glut of departures, such as the 0600-0800 rush, one could be used exclusively for departures and the other for mixed ops. Heavies will want the northern runway for it’s greater length, but Ryanair will too because it’s closer to their stands. EI short haul will likely prefer existing runway for same reason. It will all depend on traffic patterns at the time but if the departure runway can be used for the odd arrival and vice versa like Heathrow then that bottleneck around T2/28/34 won’t be anywhere near as much of a pain in the arse

Works to address this are under consideration at the minute, some/all will go ahead over the next 3 years if airlines support them and should deliver a good improvement even at peak times.

Nitrogan

Have they actually broke ground on the new runway yet?

There's what looks like a building site and piles of earth up behind the hangars at the north east of the airport for months.

jamo2oo9

Nitrogan wrote: »

Have they actually broke ground on the new runway yet?

There's what looks like a building site and piles of earth up behind the hangars at the north east of the airport for months.

Not yet. Due to begin in Q3 this year I believe. It's under tender stage at the moment.

Bussywussy

Will they take bets on it being someone other than BAM

irishgeo

how it does it actually take to build the runway? I mean surely its just a matter of digging down and finding a solid base or do they pour a concrete base in?

LiamaDelta

irishgeo wrote:

how it does it actually take to build the runway? I mean surely its just a matter of digging down and finding a solid base or do they pour a concrete base in?

I'm guessing the 'geo' in your name isn't geologist ðŸ˜

It's a very large undertaking, you've to go down far enough to find a solid base and build up from there or pile/reinforce it if you can't find a base, it's really the most important part as you can't afford it to fail over its lifetime. You can change the upper surface (as they're doing on the current runway) but the foundation is critical.

Tenger

I would agree with Liamadelta that a solid long lasting foundation is the vital element for a new runway. But I would also query the validity of assuming a geologist should be familiar with the practicalities of modern civil engineering.

Phen2206

irishgeo wrote: »

how it does it actually take to build the runway? I mean surely its just a matter of digging down and finding a solid base or do they pour a concrete base in?

And I'd imagine there's a lot to consider in terms of proper drainage of the runway's entire length and the taxiways plus all of the wiring needed for the lighting system plus the signage on the sides too. Then the ILS systems (one either end) will need to be installed, and new RNAV (GPS) approaches will need to be designed and put into use too. These will need a lot of testing before they're deemed safe for use, especially the ILS.

New arrival and departure procedures will need to be designed and phased in to suit parallel runway ops. It will take time for pilots and ATC alike to get used to this. I'm not sure if this kind of thing can be done in the background in advance but I'd be surprised if the IAA doesn't already have an idea of how they're going to change procedures to manage traffic once the parallel runway is open.

roadmaster

Bussywussy wrote: »

Will they take bets on it being someone other than BAM

5€ win sisk/Lagan/roadbridge

Jamie2k9

https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/aer-lingus-agrees-dublin-airport-expansion-deal-as-profits-rise-15pc-36638220.html

Aer Lingus agrees Dublin Airport expansion deal as profits rise 15pc

Apart from progressing a €320m runway plan, the DAA is now planning to spend another €285m on a number of projects that will include the construction of new aircraft stands on the so-called south apron, as well as taxiways and additional immigration facilities in both existing terminals.

An already complete extension to the existing Pier 1 has also been included in the calculations. The bulk of the €285m of projects will be delivered between 2019 and 2021.

That’s all on top of the €100m a year that the DAA has been spending on Dublin Airport improvements.

The Commission for Aviation Regulation (CAR) has indicated that it intends to allow the DAA — whose CEO is Dalton Philips — to recoup €267.5m of the required funds for the latest 23 capital projects through potentially higher passenger charges.

And despite the criticism of the DAA’s infrastructure rollout, Mr Kavanagh said engagement so far with Mr Philips has been “excellent”.

“There’s a recognition that, not just from an Aer Lingus perspective, but from an airport perspective, infrastructure is required,” said Mr Kavanagh.

“I think there’s now a joint agreement in terms of where and how the Aer Lingus ambition can be fulfilled in terms of the development of the south apron.”

He added: “The question then of course is how quickly it can be delivered. While we can see summer ’18 operating, beyond summer ’18 we’re seeing pinch points.”

EI also confirm 14th A330 aircraft this summer.

tricky D

Tenger wrote: »

I would agree with Liamadelta that a solid long lasting foundation is the vital element for a new runway. But I would also query the validity of assuming a geologist should be familiar with the practicalities of modern civil engineering.

It's Soil Mechanics much more than Geology in CE terms.

Idbatterim

Having that duopoly running to most European destinations isn’t in anyone’s interest! How long will it continue that an airport of over 30,000,000 has only one carrier of scale?

Locker10a

Idbatterim wrote: »

Having that duopoly running to most European destinations isn’t in anyone’s interest! How long will it continue that an airport of over 30,000,000 has only one carrier of scale?

Frankly I don’t see the dynamics changing much at Dublin. Ryanair are Europe’s mammoth low cost airline, their HQ is there and it’s their home ground! They won’t be letting many other lcc’s watlz into their territory without a fight.
Look at Gatwick, 45 million passengers and counting and Its dominated by EasyJet and BA in a similar fashion to Dublin with FR and EI.

Locker10a

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/aer-lingus-agrees-dublin-airport-expansion-deal-as-profits-rise-15pc-36638220.html

Aer Lingus agrees Dublin Airport expansion deal as profits rise 15pc

Apart from progressing a €320m runway plan, the DAA is now planning to spend another €285m on a number of projects that will include the construction of new aircraft stands on the so-called south apron, as well as taxiways and additional immigration facilities in both existing terminals.

An already complete extension to the existing Pier 1 has also been included in the calculations. The bulk of the €285m of projects will be delivered between 2019 and 2021.

That’s all on top of the €100m a year that the DAA has been spending on Dublin Airport improvements.

The Commission for Aviation Regulation (CAR) has indicated that it intends to allow the DAA — whose CEO is Dalton Philips — to recoup €267.5m of the required funds for the latest 23 capital projects through potentially higher passenger charges.

And despite the criticism of the DAA’s infrastructure rollout, Mr Kavanagh said engagement so far with Mr Philips has been “excellent”.

“There’s a recognition that, not just from an Aer Lingus perspective, but from an airport perspective, infrastructure is required,” said Mr Kavanagh.

“I think there’s now a joint agreement in terms of where and how the Aer Lingus ambition can be fulfilled in terms of the development of the south apron.”

He added: “The question then of course is how quickly it can be delivered. While we can see summer ’18 operating, beyond summer ’18 we’re seeing pinch points.”

EI also confirm 14th A330 aircraft this summer.

Can anyone explain what the new aircraft stands on the south apron will be? Is this not what has already been opened? Or is this an actual new “pier 5” ?

Jamie2k9

Locker10a wrote: »

Can anyone explain what the new aircraft stands on the south apron will be? Is this not what has already been opened? Or is this an actual new “pier 5” ?

Its an extra 5-6 stands, most likely short haul busing at peak times and long haul parking Busing from T2 from 2020 ish where some current offices are located as well. EI are really happy with the proposal anyway.

Another big benefit is dual movements on B1/Z, taxiway F (dual ops L2-4) and improving of (L3) to move traffic from L1-2 (all up to CE type). Plans should be confirmed by early summer (May-June ish) provided support is given by all stakeholders. Its also good to see they are not just sitting back and waiting for the second runway to deal with the issues and clearly listening to people. There is finally a realization that minor changes to taxiway infrastructure can have a major impact all be it 10 years to late. Perhaps the new CEO has helped!

Locker10a

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Locker10a wrote: »

Can anyone explain what the new aircraft stands on the south apron will be? Is this not what has already been opened? Or is this an actual new “pier 5” ?

Its an extra 5-6 stands, most likely short haul busing at peak times and long haul parking Busing from T2 from 2020 ish where some current offices are located as well. EI are really happy with the proposal anyway.

Another big benefit is dual movements on B1/Z, taxiway F (dual ops L2-4) and improving of (L3) to move traffic from L1-2 (all up to CE type). Plans should be confirmed by early summer (May-June ish) provided support is given by all stakeholders. Its also good to see they are not just sitting back and waiting for the second runway to deal with the issues and clearly listening to people. There is finally a realization that minor changes to taxiway infrastructure can have a major impact all be it 10 years to late. Perhaps the new CEO has helped!

Ahh ok thanks, so it’s an extra stands where they’v built the south gates. Wasn’t there a plan at some point to add an extra pier to the south of T2.

I’ll be honest, everything you’ve explained about the taxiways has gone right over my head!! But if it improves things and clears bottlenecks then I’m glad they’re doing it.

Jamie2k9

Locker10a wrote: »

Ahh ok thanks, so it’s an extra stands where they’v built the south gates. Wasn’t there a plan at some point to add an extra pier to the south of T2.

I’ll be honest, everything you’ve explained about the taxiways has gone right over my head!! But if it improves things and clears bottlenecks then I’m glad they’re doing it.

Yeah F pier, I will be surprised if relocation of cargo and F pier are not in the 2019-2024 determinations of charges. The current S Gates have 5 year planning so clearly F is in the pipeline.

Taxiway improvements should reduce parking on taxiways and cut a few minutes from taxi times generally.

Razor44

Locker10a wrote: »

Ahh ok thanks, so it’s an extra stands where they’v built the south gates. Wasn’t there a plan at some point to add an extra pier to the south of T2.

I’ll be honest, everything you’ve explained about the taxiways has gone right over my head!! But if it improves things and clears bottlenecks then I’m glad they’re doing it.

didn't make sense to me either till I looked at an apron map, then it did! also, google maps makes sense of it.

Jamie2k9

Razor44 wrote: »

didn't make sense to me either till I looked at an apron map, then it did! also, google maps makes sense of it.

I was going to link a map but in a nut shell the issues between pier 3 and 4 should see big improvements to flows of traffic.

trellheim

A lot of these problems are because T2 is full ; can a satellite terminal ( no bussing ) not be opened at the other end of the field to cater for a lot of this , it seems to me to be a case of trying to pour too much into a single T2

jamo2oo9

trellheim wrote: »

A lot of these problems are because T2 is full ; can a satellite terminal ( no bussing ) not be opened at the other end of the field to cater for a lot of this , it seems to me to be a case of trying to pour too much into a single T2

T2 isn't full, just busy during rush hour periods. I believe there's proposals to extend all of the piers in future. It was in a masterplan but can't be certain of it. Wouldn't expect it to be done in the next couple of years unless the capacity is exceeded.

trellheim

T2 isn't full, just busy during rush hour periods

your definition and mine are very different obviously.

Stobarts : bussed to remote stands

A bunch of european flights : a shed beside T2 , and a bus ride

Waiting for CBP clearance : an absolute scrum in the mornings


Full at peak hours is still full , there is still no magic machine that has my aircraft to Edinburgh at a T2 stand for the 0630 wave

LXFlyer

trellheim wrote: »

your definition and mine are very different obviously.

Stobarts : bussed to remote stands

A bunch of european flights : a shed beside T2 , and a bus ride

Waiting for CBP clearance : an absolute scrum in the mornings

Full at peak hours is still full , there is still no magic machine that has my aircraft to Edinburgh at a T2 stand for the 0630 wave

Plenty of other airports use remote stands requiring bus transfers and indeed satellite terminals with airside rail/bus access. That's nothing unique to Dublin. Heck, even Zurich, one of the best designed airports around does it.

I think your expectations are a bit high if you expect every flight to be going from a T2 stand in the AM peak. Using the 4XX stands for an ATR over an aircraft capable of using the jetbridge is overkill.

Perhaps a job change that doesn't involve as much travel might be worth a thought for your peace of mind?

Jamie2k9

Wasn't aware regulator published draft decision (thanks to Travel Extra) which show all projects planned.

https://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/PACE%20Draft%20Decision/2018-02-20%20Draft%20Decision%20final%20draft.pdf

Apron Map for those who want to see where the changes will be:
http://iaip.iaa.ie/iaip/Published%20Files/AIP%20Files/AD/Chart%20Files/EIDW/EI_AD_2_EIDW_24-2_en.pdf

trellheim

Perhaps a job change that doesn't involve as much travel might be worth a thought for your peace of mind?

Thanks for the concern -

My point was an example ; T2 is effectively full when it matters .

Zurich - your example - has people movers designed and built in to run the satellite properly which is excellent. I've no real issue with bussing when its needed ( LGW ) or short term to get over a temporary capacity constraint

That shed beside T2 requires bussing as there is no facility to segregate inbounds and outbounds - a classic case of short-term planning to get over the unpleasant issue that

T2 is full at peak times.

Edit : I've looked at Jamies linkn - thanks for that. Crosslinked is the PACE study here https://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/PACE/17-10-5%20DUB-%20PACE%20Document.pdf

Which backs up my point - Aircraft Stands at Max Capacity ( p29 )

LXFlyer

trellheim wrote: »

Thanks for the concern -

My point was an example ; T2 is effectively full when it matters .

Zurich - your example - has people movers designed and built in to run the satellite properly which is excellent. I've no real issue with bussing when its needed ( LGW ) or short term to get over a temporary capacity constraint

That shed beside T2 requires bussing as there is no facility to segregate inbounds and outbounds - a classic case of short-term planning to get over the unpleasant issue that

T2 is full at peak times.

Edit : I've looked at Jamies linkn - thanks for that. Crosslinked is the PACE study here https://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/PACE/17-10-5%20DUB-%20PACE%20Document.pdf

Which backs up my point - Aircraft Stands at Max Capacity ( p29 )

When I mentioned Zürich I was referring to being bussed to remote stands - I’ve been bussed to and from remote stands at both Zürich and Frankfurt repeatedly - in many places it is the norm. Hardly something to get too worked up about.

Jamie2k9

trellheim wrote: »

Thanks for the concern -

My point was an example ; T2 is effectively full when it matters .

Zurich - your example - has people movers designed and built in to run the satellite properly which is excellent. I've no real issue with bussing when its needed ( LGW ) or short term to get over a temporary capacity constraint

That shed beside T2 requires bussing as there is no facility to segregate inbounds and outbounds - a classic case of short-term planning to get over the unpleasant issue that

T2 is full at peak times.

Edit : I've looked at Jamies linkn - thanks for that. Crosslinked is the PACE study here https://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/PACE/17-10-5%20DUB-%20PACE%20Document.pdf

Which backs up my point - Aircraft Stands at Max Capacity ( p29 )

Criticize DUB for things yet saying yes busing is fine at LGW because the airport messed up with the domestic channels in the S Terminal while building the new pier when around 2 million domestic passengers through the S Terminal per year!

They gave Easyjet the N terminal and control over the proper domestic channels.

The T2 shed is short term planning and would of been needed whatever way you look at it. Look how Pier 1 was constructed and the Shed was needed.