Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Pre-clearance expansion internationally

  • 01-06-2015 11:11am
    #1
    markpb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,390 ✭✭✭


    The Department of Homeland Security announced plans to expand immigration pre-clearance to 10 new airports around the world.

    Brussels
    Punta Cana
    Tokyo Narita
    Amsterdam
    Oslo
    Madrid
    Stockholm
    Istanbul
    London Heathrow
    Manchester

    link

    This will obviously take a long time to happen but I wonder how much of an impact it will have on Dublin?
    I'd be less worried about the UK airports because of their taxes and generally poor perception.......but I can see Madrid and Amsterdam taking a lot of traffic from Dublin.


Comments

  • #2
    Tenger
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 10,005 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    This could take years to happen but definitely would make in a dent in the DUB market and specifically the EI operation.
    I could see AMS implementing it very well, they have a large but very well laid out multi terminal airport. MAD I am not sure of, are the US bound flights spread across terminals?
    The problem for LHR is the multiple airlines departing from multiple non-neighbouring terminals.
    I could see BA being willing to pay for CBP in T5, but that leaves the others in the cold, unless they want CBP in T5 and T3?


  • #3
    Fred Swanson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,730 ✭✭✭✭Fred Swanson


    This post has been deleted.


  • #4
    BonkeyDonker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 571 ✭✭✭BonkeyDonker


    markpb wrote: »
    but I can see Madrid and Amsterdam taking a lot of traffic from Dublin.

    I dont, especially for UK traffic as you still need to backtrack to go forward. Sure it will lessen Dublin advantage, but not effect it hugely.


  • #5
    flazio
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,413 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    I wonder then if Speedbird 1 would then consider a different route to JFK?

    This too shall pass.



  • #6
    CINCLANTFLT
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭CINCLANTFLT


    flazio wrote: »
    I wonder then if Speedbird 1 would then consider a different route to JFK?

    Speaking of Speedbird 1... Does it still go via Shannon... If so, can you join it at Shannon?


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Fred Swanson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,730 ✭✭✭✭Fred Swanson


    This post has been deleted.


  • #8
    markpb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,390 ✭✭✭markpb


    BonkeyDonker wrote: »
    I dont, especially for UK traffic as you still need to backtrack to go forward. Sure it will lessen Dublin advantage, but not effect it hugely.

    Not for UK traffic sure but for the rest of Europe?


  • #9
    Peregrine
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    flazio wrote: »
    I wonder then if Speedbird 1 would then consider a different route to JFK?
    Well, the only other option would be MAN. I think they'd stick to SNN. Shorter transatlantic leg, less busier etc.

    Having pre clearance at LHR might make LCY-SNN-JFK a little less atrractive in terms of time savings but I think a lot of them would still prefer to avoid LHR.
    CINCLANTFLT wrote: »
    Speaking of Speedbird 1... Does it still go via Shannon... If so, can you join it at Shannon?

    Yes and no.


  • #10
    Dardania
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,612 ✭✭✭Dardania


    Nim wrote: »
    Well, the only other option would be MAN. I think they'd stick to SNN. Shorter transatlantic leg, less busier etc.

    Having pre clearance at LHR might make LCY-SNN-JFK a little less atrractive in terms of time savings but I think a lot of them would still prefer to avoid LHR.



    Yes and no.

    Long trip from LCY to LHR by the time you get the DLR and then onto the tube


  • #11
    Tenger
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 10,005 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    Speedbird 1 (and 3) would still have to stop somewhere for fuel. Apparently EDI/GLA were considered when the route was being planned...but SNN won as it had the extra advantage of CBP pre-clearance.

    And as above, CBP at LHR would not hugely impact this very, very specific market.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Peregrine
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peregrine


    Oh, I know :) I probably should have said I know most of them would rather pay a lot more than trek across London.


  • #13
    Chris_5339762
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,064 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    Plus you can get in/out of LCY far far far faster than Heathrow, and if you're coming into LCY, plane to DLR is immeasurably quicker than LHR, then only 20 minutes to Canary Wharf on the DLR.


  • #14
    JCX BXC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,368 ✭✭✭✭JCX BXC


    CINCLANTFLT wrote: »
    Speaking of Speedbird 1... Does it still go via Shannon... If so, can you join it at Shannon?

    It still goes via Shannon. The later flight speedbird 3 doesnt pre-clear but they still fly via Shannon.

    You can't join it atm, but there's talks of that changing, its laid out as a serious consideration in the expansion plans for Shannon with IAG (pending Aer Lingus bid approval).


Advertisement