Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

billie1b

billie1b wrote: »

The octagon in Pier A was a temporary structure for 5 years and is still here 20 odd years later, never trust what DAA say

Hopefully the plans of recent years put pay to both of them.

trellheim

What on earth is wrong with bussing straight to and from a remote stand, it does not all have to be regiona aircraft bussing or have an intermedate shed to put passengers into , Munich has this down to a fine art including for Long-Haul.

This would solve a lot of the problems with stands being mentioned here.

KevR

trellheim wrote: »

What on earth is wrong with bussing straight to and from a remote stand, it does not all have to be regiona aircraft bussing or have an intermedate shed to put passengers into , Munich has this down to a fine art including for Long-Haul.

This would solve a lot of the problems with stands being mentioned here.

I have only used Munich a couple of times. I was not overly impressed.
On both occasions, there was one bus that had to do several runs from aircraft to gate. Boarding seemed to take forever and we were late departing. Similar experience in Dusseldorf. Maybe just an unlucky coincidence but still..

LXFlyer

KevR wrote: »

I have only used Munich a couple of times. I was not overly impressed.
On both occasions, there was one bus that had to do several runs from aircraft to gate. Boarding seemed to take forever and we were late departing. Similar experience in Dusseldorf. Maybe just an unlucky coincidence but still..

Was that the Lufthansa terminal in Munich?

Stephen Strange

trellheim wrote: »

What on earth is wrong with bussing straight to and from a remote stand, it does not all have to be regiona aircraft bussing or have an intermedate shed to put passengers into , Munich has this down to a fine art including for Long-Haul.

This would solve a lot of the problems with stands being mentioned here.

I would imagine they do not have enough boarding gates in the existing terminal space to bus directly to the aircraft. The south gates provide additional boarding gates as afaik they only use 1 gate in the terminal and provide an additional 5 gates, serving 9 stands.

Chris_5339762

Everything seemed to be taking off about 40 minutes after pushback time according to a quick FR browse this morning. Sure, they're landing on time (just) due to padding but 40 minutes from pushback to takeoff is ridiculous.

Chris_5339762

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Everything seemed to be taking off about 40 minutes after pushback time according to a quick FR browse this morning. Sure, they're landing on time (just) due to padding but 40 minutes from pushback to takeoff is ridiculous.

That doesn’t mean 40 mins taxi time. Why are you assuming they are pushing on time ? Does it really matter what time you push at if you land on time or early !

Bussywussy

Some of blame goes to ground ATC...I was watching some movement over the last few days from pier B and T2 stands especially and some of the movements were not thought out at all..holding an aircraft on stand that could of easily pushed well back out of way before an aircraft taxiing taking up another gate...

another example was an A330 On stand 314..was waiting in queue for push,the A320 next door on 315L(I think)could of pushed to Juliet but instead cleared to Hotel so blocked in the 330 that could of went to Uniform...there was none inbound at this time.
Granted they have to deals with tools they're given but some don't see bigger pic at all

Bussywussy

Bussywussy wrote: »

Some of blame goes to ground ATC...I was watching some movement over the last few days from pier B and T2 stands especially and some of the movements were not thought out at all..holding an aircraft on stand that could of easily pushed well back out of way before an aircraft taxiing taking up another stand

ACDM.

embraer170

Dublin airport was a mess today. I had two family members on two separate Ryanair flights, and I was on a third (different) flight.

My flight left 40 minutes late, despite the inbound (Ryanair) aircraft being 20 minutes early. The blame was on ground congestion.

Huge security queues at T1, but T2 was a lot better.

The second runway cannot come soon enough.

Bussywussy

Deleted User wrote: »

Bussywussy wrote: »

Some of blame goes to ground ATC...I was watching some movement over the last few days from pier B and T2 stands especially and some of the movements were not thought out at all..holding an aircraft on stand that could of easily pushed well back out of way before an aircraft taxiing taking up another stand

ACDM.

Can anyone comment if this actually works in Dublin...I think the layout is too much of a mess

Bussywussy

Bussywussy wrote: »

Can anyone comment if this actually works in Dublin...I think the layout is too much of a mess

Similar comments and issues arose at both Milan Malpensa and Heathrow when introduced until everyone got used to it calling some of the shots.

Why wouldn’t it work, try taxiing to 36L at Amsterdam or 27R at Heathrow from a cup de sac at T4 or deep within the T3 cup de sac.

Locker10a

moloner4 wrote: »

Hopefully Shane Ross can get the ball rolling for a third terminal. Still can't believe the DAA CEO wants 55mil a year before they start to build it, seems like it'll burst now.

https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/ross-wont-rule-out-privaterun-third-terminal-at-dublin-airport-36919227.html

Gatwick manage 40+ Million passenger annually, with two terminals and one runway. Massive focus and investment on efficiency is the key here. In my experience Dublin is not an efficient airport.
So while 55+ million might be a stretch there is most definitely room for more without starting a brand new terminal from scratch.

Locker10a

Locker10a wrote: »

Gatwick manage 40+ Million passenger annually, with two terminals and one runway. Massive focus and investment on efficiency is the key here. In my experience Dublin is not an efficient airport.
So while 55+ million might be a stretch there is most definitely room for more without starting a brand new terminal from scratch.

I would think it would be a fabulous opportunity to build a modern efficient zero emission facility that uses the best international techniques and learned knowledge to streamline the experience for everyone, then do like Heathrow and gradually realign the east side of the airfield.

Certainly we need could get rid of 40 seat turboprops from the airport and Stobarts 70 seaters could be upgraded to 100-120 seat regional jets to increase seats per movement.

Locker10a

Deleted User wrote: »

Locker10a wrote: »

Gatwick manage 40+ Million passenger annually, with two terminals and one runway. Massive focus and investment on efficiency is the key here. In my experience Dublin is not an efficient airport.
So while 55+ million might be a stretch there is most definitely room for more without starting a brand new terminal from scratch.

I would think it would be a fabulous opportunity to build a modern efficient zero emission facility that uses the best international techniques and learned knowledge to streamline the experience for everyone, then do like Heathrow and gradually realign the east side of the airfield.

Certainly we need could get rid of 40 seat turboprops from the airport and Stobarts 70 seaters could be upgraded to 100-120 seat regional jets to increase seats per movement.

Yeah sure but that’s a dream!! And even if the new terminal was bult and was the most modern and efficient on the planet, do you think it would be properly connected to the road and proposed rail network ? I doubt it!
The thing with the smaller aircraft is they do serve a market and serve it perfectly well, there are a lot of other things to be done before they need to regulate aircraft size, runway movements are painfully slow in comparison to Heathrow and Gatwick for example.

markpb

Deleted User wrote: »

Certainly we need could get rid of 40 seat turboprops from the airport and Stobarts 70 seaters could be upgraded to 100-120 seat regional jets to increase seats per movement.

A big part of Dublins success as a hub, ignoring the APT, is the fact that it takes flights in small planes from all over the UK. It was mentioned last year in the UK parliament the Dublin was better connected to the UK regions than Heathrow.

markpb

markpb wrote: »

A big part of Dublins success as a hub, ignoring the APT, is the fact that it takes flights in small planes from all over the UK. It was mentioned last year in the UK parliament the Dublin was better connected to the UK regions than Heathrow.

The point was to make better use of the slots available and the quickest way is to start upgrading capacity. I agree Dublin is highly connected to the U.K. but the next stage is jets replacing props.

Locker10a

Locker10a wrote: »

Yeah sure but that’s a dream!! And even if the new terminal was bult and was the most modern and efficient on the planet, do you think it would be properly connected to the road and proposed rail network ? I doubt it!
The thing with the smaller aircraft is they do serve a market and serve it perfectly well, there are a lot of other things to be done before they need to regulate aircraft size, runway movements are painfully slow in comparison to Heathrow and Gatwick for example.

When you say painfully slow you can’t really compare Dublin to Heathrow due to the dedicated runways at Heathrow. But Dublin will soon be on a par movements wise with one of Heathrow’s runways. 237k versus c225k movements per runway. Heathrow’s hourly departure rate is slightly ahead of Dublin’s 44 v 41.

I can’t really compare to Gatwick as I’ve never sat down to watch them operate. Additionally comparing Dublin to Gatwick is unfair however. Gatwick has been a 30 million plus passenger airport for at least 20 years now https://www.londongatwickairport.net/passenger-statistics.shtml
So they are 20 years further down the evolution trail as an airport and manages 55 movements per hour (max 3 hours in a row only) outside of that it’s 50 per hour in comparison to Dublin’s 48.4 per hour. Multiple lineup points and holding areas allowing a better departure sequence flow and better RETs allowing traffic to vacate the runway quicker while a landing zone much further down the runway giving the departure more time to be in position ready to roll immediately help the departure. However Gatwick’s taxi time is similar to Dublin’s at a mean time of 20 mins.

Worthy of note is Manchester’s declared hourly rate in dual runway operation is 61 or 49 on single runway. Manchester is a similar sized airport and a far better comparison. As you can see we are on a par but obviously slight tweaks by the DAA and IAA could eek out an extra movement or two per hour max.

faoiarvok

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The point was to make better use of the slots available and the quickest way is to start upgrading capacity. I agree Dublin is highly connected to the U.K. but the next stage is jets replacing props.

I really don’t think forcing operators to add more seats where they don’t see demand makes sense. The PSO routes to Kerry and Donegal are already subsidised, they’d have to get even more money to run jets that they can’t fill

Lads it’s theoretical, there will be no forcing operators and there will obviously be operational limits on operating in to some airports like Donegal.

The point is at some stage by 2021-2022 the only way we will see growth will be in increased aircraft size. Turkish have already suggested a mix of heavies for here from their next order. Larger heavy aircraft from US airlines. BA will need to replace their European 767’s with something so that’s a possibility for here.

Locker10a

Deleted User wrote: »

Locker10a wrote: »

I can’t really compare to Gatwick as I’ve never sat down to watch them operate. Additionally comparing Dublin to Gatwick is unfair however. Gatwick has been a 30 million plus passenger airport for at least 20 years now https://www.londongatwickairport.net/passenger-statistics.shtml
So they are 20 years further down the evolution trail as an airport and manages 55 movements per hour (max 3 hours in a row only) outside of that it’s 50 per hour in comparison to Dublin’s 48.4 per hour. Multiple lineup points and holding areas allowing a better departure sequence flow and better RETs allowing traffic to vacate the runway quicker while a landing zone much further down the runway giving the departure more time to be in position ready to roll immediately help the departure. However Gatwick’s taxi time is similar to Dublin’s at a mean time of 20 mins.

.

I think Gatwick while ahead of Dublin, should be the goal for Dublin right now. Multiple line up points, holing areas and RETs should be a priority for the DAA and IAA right now. I also think it’s a fair comparison as it’s a two terminal airport with a much greater capacity on all accounts, road, rail, runway and terminal.
Putting aside the operational reluctance with the IAA terminal capacity looks like it’s going to be a disaster from next year. The 100 gates pier would really want to be extended asap by a minimum of 10 new stands ideally back towards Hangar 6.

Locker10a

Locker10a wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

I think Gatwick while ahead of Dublin, should be the goal for Dublin right now. Multiple line up points, holing areas and RETs should be a priority for the DAA and IAA right now. I also think it’s a fair comparison as it’s a two terminal airport with a much greater capacity on all accounts, road, rail, runway and terminal.
Putting aside the operational reluctance with the IAA terminal capacity looks like it’s going to be a disaster from next year. The 100 gates pier would really want to be extended asap by a minimum of 10 new stands ideally back towards Hangar 6.

Comparing it like for like no, but comparing with Gatwick as somewhere it needs to be aiming at yes.

Plans are afoot to to extend the 100 gates east it’s called Apron 5H and it’s more than what you’ve suggested stands wide.

The south east bus gates are getting 5-6 more stands. I assume on the south side.

Jamie2k9

Emirates says DAA should build and run third Dublin terminal

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/emirates-says-daa-should-build-and-run-third-dublin-terminal-1.3505921?mode=amp&__twitter_impression=true

Jamie2k9

moloner4 wrote: »

Meanwhile emirates can't add a third daily flight due lack of infrastructure in Dublin airport....
https://fora.ie/emirates-dublin-dubai-4029445-May2018/

That's one excuse to use, there are many reasons pilots shortage, over capacity (fares way to low at minute), rising oil and yes capacity a problem. They have said they are focusing on yield now.

If EK really wanted to add a 3rd daily they would, do you think capacity issues will stop EY or CX or QR growing a market if demand is there, I don't...

EK also dropped 2 class flights a few months ago taking capacity out.

Jamie2k9

moloner4 wrote: »

I think the article raised good points that they would look at an early morning flight 6am-7.30am in T2, but state that it's check-in, boarding and gate restriction are an issue.

Unless they moved to T1 I can't see any major morning launches!

I agree capacity is an issue and it was partly why EY moved to T1 but saying they feel you cannot add a third flight a few months after reducing capacity doesn't stack up. The reality is the market is saturated needs time to absorb and improve profitability. They are flying several thousand (4000-5000) less seats per month now.

If they said tomorrow they want a 3rd flight the daa would make it happen even if it meant upsetting EI at T2!

jamo2oo9

Emirates has a good reason to drop 2 class configuration and move to 3 class configuration.

1/ Less passengers to carry means more expensive cargo can be flown. In lieu of a few passengers each flight could be worth a few grand.

2/ By adding 1st class to their flights means more money as well. One first class seat is an equivalent of 4/5 economy seats or 2/3 business class seats.
Typical fare from Dublin to Dubai return
Economy - €725
Business Class - €2870
First Class - €4700

At the end of the day, Emirates, like every other airline, are in the business of making money. They obviously want a 3rd flight because there is demand for both cargo and passengers.

Jamie2k9

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

Emirates has a good reason to drop 2 class configuration and move to 3 class configuration.

1/ Less passengers to carry means more expensive cargo can be flown. In lieu of a few passengers each flight could be worth a few grand.

2/ By adding 1st class to their flights means more money as well. One first class seat is an equivalent of 4/5 economy seats or 2/3 business class seats.
Typical fare from Dublin to Dubai return
Economy - €725
Business Class - €2870
First Class - €4700

At the end of the day, Emirates, like every other airline, are in the business of making money. They obviously want a 3rd flight because there is demand for both cargo and passengers.

Not enough to add one, the ME is cut throat at the minute and all carriers are squeezed fighting to keep passengers.

F seats are great when they are filled, the moved to a 2 class because they were not filling enough of them.

Apart from July/August, EK loads could be improved massively within existing capacity. The business of making money is why they have indifferently delayed a 3rd flight.

Just look how many are stored in Dubai now, they are trying to improve profits adding a 3rd daily would go against this strategy unless they are confident of a return.

Between 0600 and 0800 when he claims he wants to start the 3rd flight I’m nearly certain there are no slots available. So he is talking through his hat. He can get a 3rd flight in but it won’t be at HIS preferred times.

Jamie2k9

Deleted User wrote: »

Between 0600 and 0800 when he claims he wants to start the 3rd flight I’m nearly certain there are no slots available. So he is talking through his hat. He can get a 3rd flight in but it won’t be at HIS preferred times.

He would get an arrival slot no problem and most EK morning departures (western Europe) are from 08.30-10.00 so shouldn't be a problem. He does have a point about T2 stands but not impossible.

Blut2

Jamie's right - EK had terrible F sales in DUB, thats why they moved to a two-class set-up instead. Even with the Irish economy picking up since then I'm not sure how much that situation will have changed. DUB just doesn't have enough "high rollers" regularly using it to fly Eastwards to fill a large number of very expensive F long haul seats. I'd have my suspicions that moving back to a two-class set-up is from a position of weakness, not strength, given that.