Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

jamo2oo9

Nim wrote: »

I, too, was wondering where you got that from. I think I've seen it before but I can't remember where. I thought it was the recent CIP proposal but I found a slightly different one in that.

Edit: Found it.
http://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/image/2009-03-02_daa_cip_2010-2014.pdf
Page 31. Anyone know what label 49 is? They don't have a legend for the numbers.

It could be a new railway line serving Dublin Airport or it could be the Metro Noth tunnels but I don't think they planned to serve the airport initially?


EDIT: Yup, it's a Metro Light Rail System. Last line of page 29.

Peregrine

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

It could be a new railway line serving Dublin Airport or it could be the Metro Noth tunnels but I don't think they planned to serve the airport initially?


EDIT: Yup, it's a Metro Light Rail System. Last line of page 29.

Metro North will definitely serve the airport. The dotted pink line matches the alignment of Metro North. 55 is where it surfaces.

http://www.rpa.ie/Maps/Metro%20North/MN%20Ortho%20Maps%202008/BMN0000GD3501B04.map.pdf

http://www.rpa.ie/Documents/Metro%20North/Metro%20North%20Letters/October%202006%20-%20Dublin%20Metro%20North.pdf

That line at 49 is probably DAA's own addition/vision rather than an actual proposal. Nevermind.

Irish Steve

The other thing that's interesting in those maps of the airport is the amended road layout at the main entry point where the M1 and the old N1 meet at the roundabout, there's evidence of some updates there which would make life a lot simpler for everyone if it happened.

steve-o

Nim wrote: »

That line at 49 is probably DAA's own addition/vision rather than an actual proposal. Nevermind.

"Well sir, there's nothing on earth like a genuine, bona fide, electrified, six-car Monorail."

It's their internal "people mover" from when they completely lost the run of themselves and decided to get on the property bandwagon with "Dublin Airport City". They are still clinging to a scaled down version of the office development idea (€45 million spent so far).

LXFlyer

Pat Dunne wrote: »

Can you give a link to the complete document where you got the attachment from.
Thanks

Nim wrote: »

I, too, was wondering where you got that from. I think I've seen it before but I can't remember where. I thought it was the recent CIP proposal but I found a slightly different one in that.

Edit: Found it.
http://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/image/2009-03-02_daa_cip_2010-2014.pdf
Page 31. Anyone know what label 49 is? They don't have a legend for the numbers.

Yep - that's where it comes from. Apologies for not adding the link earlier.

LXFlyer

The latest proposals show a revised layout for the airport but still show a pier (this time it's an extended pier A) interfering with runway 16/34.


http://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/2014-05-29%20DAA%20Capital%20Investment%20Proposals.pdf


Scroll to page 190 for runway proposal.

Bebop

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

Once 25m pax use the Dublin Airport in one year, that'll trigger the start of building the parallel runway.

I know that they are doing some prep work at the Eastern end but is it ready to go?

I would expect the they would spend 6 months just fencing it off and hammering stakes in the ground, the whole job might take 2-3 years, I saw on Ultimate Airport that Dubai built a new runway from scratch in 3 months

billie1b

Bebop wrote: »

I know that they are doing some prep work at the Eastern end but is it ready to go?

I would expect the they would spend 6 months just fencing it off and hammering stakes in the ground, the whole job might take 2-3 years, I saw on Ultimate Airport that Dubai built a new runway from scratch in 3 months

Is that the same RWY that was falling apart and they built a new one to rebuild it or was that the new RWY they built to rebuild the old RWY that was falling apart?

PukkaStukka

lxflyer wrote: »

The latest proposals show a revised layout for the airport but still show a pier (this time it's an extended pier A) interfering with runway 16/34.


http://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/2014-05-29%20DAA%20Capital%20Investment%20Proposals.pdf


Scroll to page 190 for runway proposal.

They seem hell-bent of scrapping 16-34. Very bad move IMHO.

owenc

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

It could be a new railway line serving Dublin Airport or it could be the Metro Noth tunnels but I don't think they planned to serve the airport initially?


EDIT: Yup, it's a Metro Light Rail System. Last line of page 29.

They should really be building a railway station rather than a metro system. Kind of like Stansted.

Idbatterim

I would expect the they would spend 6 months just fencing it off and hammering stakes in the ground, the whole job might take 2-3 years, I saw on Ultimate Airport that Dubai built a new runway from scratch in 3 months

Given that the cat and cage bus lane (only a tiny stretch) has been a work in progress for over a year, the 6 months to fence it off, might be ambitious... :rolleyes:

Peregrine

owenc wrote: »

They should really be building a railway station rather than a metro system. Kind of like Stansted.

Who are "they"?

They're two completely different situations. The distance from Liverpool Street to Standsted is almost five times the distance between city centre and DUB. A metro rail connection is more than sufficient.

Are you saying Metro North, a metro system serving most of North Dublin as well as the airport, shouldn't be built? Replaced by a slower DART spur from Clongriffin just to say that it's a "railway station"? Or that the track gauge of the current proposal should be 1600mm?

Don't just throw it out there, what do you mean by that?


Tengee? :pac: Can we have another thread for things like this? Or can we just discuss all future DUB developments here? Discussing the runway always brings up other topics like the proposals in the CIP above, ATC tower, MN and so on.

lord lucan

Nim wrote: »

Tengee? :pac: Can we have another thread for things like this? Or can we just discuss all future DUB developments here? Discussing the runway always brings up other topics like the proposals in the CIP above, ATC tower, MN and so on.

Keep it here, I'll rename the thread to cover everything else.

PukkaStukka

Nim wrote: »

Who are "they"?

They're two completely different situations. The distance from Liverpool Street to Standsted is almost five times the distance between city centre and DUB. A metro rail connection is more than sufficient.

Are you saying Metro North, a metro system serving most of North Dublin as well as the airport, shouldn't be built? Replaced by a slower DART spur from Clongriffin just to say that it's a "railway station"? Or that the track gauge of the current proposal should be 1600mm?

Don't just throw it out there, what do you mean by that?


Tengee? :pac: Can we have another thread for things like this? Or can we just discuss all future DUB developments here? Discussing the runway always brings up other topics like the proposals in the CIP above, ATC tower, MN and so on.

The DART is already there @ CLongriffin as is the land corridor to reach it. The Metro I'm afraid only exists in the minds of those who really want it. As much as it should be built, I really fear it isn't going to happen as Fingal CoCo are actively trying to sell a "Swiftway" Solution. It's more to do with getting land north of Swords serviced for development rather than providing an integrated transport solution which includes the airport.

man98

I'd support the idea of a Dart connection rather than a Metro connection. It may not be perfect but it is most certainly needed, as well as a smoother connection between Wexford/ Dundalk/ Sligo/ Maynooth etc. to the airport.

donvito99

man98 wrote: »

I'd support the idea of a Dart connection rather than a Metro connection. It may not be perfect but it is most certainly needed, as well as a smoother connection between Wexford/ Dundalk/ Sligo/ Maynooth etc. to the airport.

Sligo/Maynooth passengers would change at Drumcondra, would be far quicker.

A DART link (as is being proposed) is an expensive mistake in that it adds to the capacity problem on the Northern Line and will most likely have a frequency of 15 mins at peak.

We forget that the Airport is very close to the city, and the existing bus service to the CC is actually good by the city's standards.

If we're going to build a rail link we ought to do it right, and as it stands, that can be done by building the Metro.

Bebop

billie1b wrote: »

Is that the same RWY that was falling apart and they built a new one to rebuild it or was that the new RWY they built to rebuild the old RWY that was falling apart?

I think it was the new one they built to replace the old one, to be fair it was a Tarmac surface which would be quicker and cheaper than 6 feet of mass concrete

Tabnabs

An interesting comment by Emirates regarding Dublin Airport. While it's not an official announcement, it comes from high enough up the chain to bear some weight.

https://twitter.com/IrishAero/status/559013353893691393?s=09

donvito99

New stand required.

Realistically, as well as a new runway, a new Pier A or B, or perhaps an annex to the south of E where cargo is presently is a necessity. Etihad, Emirates (and other carriers who don't do pre-clearance) should have to move. If the EI takeover goes through, we'll probably see BA at T2 soon enough.

New remote A380 stand being built currently, DAA propose to refurbish Pier B (303) to be A380 capable with triple airbridge and new departure lounge(could be what they are referring to). According to plans that's meant to start later this year I think.

KoolKid

Would love to see those baby's arrive.

kub

KoolKid wrote: »

Would love to see those baby's arrive.

If that's a baby I feel sorry for its mammy.....

jamo2oo9

Deleted User wrote: »

New remote A380 stand being built currently, DAA propose to refurbish Pier B (303) to be A380 capable with triple airbridge and new departure lounge(could be what they are referring to). According to plans that's meant to start later this year I think.

Have you got a link to this? This is the first I've heard of anything about that?

donvito99

What does a remote A380 stand entail? Hardly a tower with a few airbridges out on the west apron, with pax coming down to ground level and onto buses?

BonkeyDonker

lxflyer wrote: »

http://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/2014-05-29%20DAA%20Capital%20Investment%20Proposals.pdf

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

Have you got a link to this? This is the first I've heard of anything about that?

See page 132/3 of the above.

Pat Dunne

http://www.aviationreg.ie/_fileupload/2014-05-29%20DAA%20Capital%20Investment%20Proposals.pdf

Page 55 of the document states the following

15.7.116 Pier 3 Flexibility (€ 15m)
The existing wide-body stands at Pier 3 are unable to accommodate new larger aircraft such as the B777-300 and the A380. This project incorporates modifications to adapt two existing stands, 303 and 305C at the pier and provision of an additional stand on the existing apron footprint of stands 306 and 307 in a MARS configuration to provide flexibility and resilience to wide-body aircraft parking demand at Pier 4, and future forecast demand in the context of both T1 and T2 operations. Modifications to gate areas within the pier are incorporated in the project in order to provide the necessary capacity and service levels for these large aircraft. Provision for an additional airline lounge has also been included.

Page 56 shows the following table
7.5.2 Business Development Projects Timelines

It sure looks great on paper

man98

Can the current runway physically take the A380? One was flown in for that flightfest in 2013, but that was empty and presumably coming from London. How about an 8 hour route with a good bit of pax and cargo?

Peregrine

The BA A380 never landed at DUB during Flightfest. It flew in from England, did 3 fly bys and went home.

NewSigGuy

man98 wrote: »

Can the current runway physically take the A380? One was flown in for that flightfest in 2013, but that was empty and presumably coming from London. How about an 8 hour route with a good bit of pax and cargo?

Yeh no issues for routes up to about 10hrs.

EB_2013

If the new parallel runway ever gets to go ahead will the close proximity to the hangers cause a problem on landings with winds.

Wasn't this a problem when 29/11 was in use.