Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

1336337339341342366

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 372 ✭✭Qaanaaq


    Not sure if anyone can access the Business post article, but it seems Fingal has decided to reignite high court proceedings over night time flights.

    https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/the-anton-savage-show/high-court-proceedings-reignited-over-nighttime-flights-at-dublin-airport



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,143 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    To be fair, the article also says that that apply to the Supreme Court for leave to appeal. At the time the article was published, they had the option to continue.

    What was their game here. What was the issue with a service tunnel, and how was opposing it going to be profitable for them. Not something I've looked at, but at a glance, I can't see what there game was at all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 990 ✭✭✭HTCOne


    Possibly because any stands activated for passenger use on the West Apron would be attractive to fellow LCCs and increase capacity for same, E.G. Wizzair.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭dublin12367


    For crying out loud! Fingal are an absolute disgrace.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭davebuck


    I can't see this as anything else but FCC being seen to act, even they must know with ABP still slowly deciding the appeal the courts will be reluctant to get involved. I would love to know what the story was a few years ago when the DAA applied to lift the cap but withdrew as the DAA claimed FCC advised them!

    This is the reply I got from ABP in April to the appeal case on the night time flights.

    The file is currently with an Inspector for their report. Once this is discharged it will be moved to the Board for decision.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,034 ✭✭✭MICKEYG


    I took a flight from the 335 gates today. When taxi'ing we went around the main terminal 2 pier and there was a lot of construction between the pier and the south runway. Anyone know what is being done?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭davebuck


    I think it's taxiway improvements and allows aircraft pass each other etc. open to correction?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,553 ✭✭✭JohnC.


    FCC issue enforcement notice over cap breach. This’ll be fun


    https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2025/0620/1519520-airport-passenger-cap/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,968 ✭✭✭sparrowcar


    It won't be fun, FCC are insignificant at this stage.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,809 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    But they aren't. Not yet. They still have recourse to the Courts to find the executive and board liable for breaches.

    The government need to compose an urgent bill to return absolute control of state aviation infrastructure and operations to themselves in the person of the Minister for Transport and / or the IAA.

    Fingal won't shut up until they are permanently muted.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,968 ✭✭✭sparrowcar


    That's fair, but thankfully FCC's involvement in this comes to an end soon.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,566 ✭✭✭Economics101


    I wouldn't mind but the High Court has effectively suspended the cap, pending litigation. Sounds like FCC are true to the midless box-ticking school of Irish regulation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,099 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    FCC reminds me of a security guard with notions of self importance who think they are law enforcement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 159 ✭✭Phen2206


    That is correct, and to be specific the works are to enable two widebody aircraft to pass each other on that taxiway, whereas before the works two narrow-bodies could pass each other but widebodies had to taxi past the end of the pier one-in-one-out. Shame there wasn't more foresight when the pier was built instead of having to dig the place up with the associated cost now vs c. 2010. Anyways as for completion date who knows. Must have been 2 years ago now I heard an ATC controller saying it would be 18 months.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭davebuck


    FCC acting like clowns to the end at this stage, even Drive time on RTE called the rep out from FCC, who ever in Government is in charge of FCC should be highly embarrassed…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 159 ✭✭Phen2206


    I can see the scenario where the local councillors in FCC are just pandering to the 28R noise brigade with the next local election in mind, knowing full well that ultimately the Govt will soon take such decisions re the airport out of their hands and it will become the local TDs' problem then. They'll probably be delighted to be rid of the issue. Meanwhile next local election Fingal councillors can argue on the doorsteps that they "did their best" to keep the cap, "issuing enforcement notices and all".



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 328 ✭✭jwm121


    Anyone have any insight on the night time cap in ABP? That could cause major disruption if in favour of the NIMBYs…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭davebuck


    This is what I received from ABP on the 30th April

    The file is currently with an Inspector for their report. Once this is discharged it will be moved to the Board for decision.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭dublin12367


    Sure what’s the rush. It’s only a major national asset that’s linked to the Irish economy & its operations that’s being reviewed. No panic.. Better give ABP another year or two for good measure. 3 years with ABP this summer and either way the decision will be judicial reviewed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭davebuck


    I only hope the final decision is an improvement on the initial one last September!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭dublin12367


    The draft decision last year looked like it intended to be a positive one but ABP ballsed it up with the movement cap of 13,000, as the quota and allowances in the decision besides this cap were all realistic, balanced and acceptable.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭davebuck


    Agreed and the cap of 13,000 made no sense at all



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,074 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    I think there's valid reasons to have a nighttime cap or hour restrictions tbh. Won't be the only major airport with that (London airports, Frankfurt, Zurich all have them)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭dublin12367


    Nobody is suggesting otherwise. However the draft decision likely included an error which if it was the final decision is neither balanced, or realistic and would seriously hamper Aerlingus’ Hub model and freight in particular.

    It’s worth remembering there’s numerous airports in London, and only 1 in Dublin. The night caps and quotas at some London airports and Frankfurt and Zurich differ from the draft proposed at Dublin as their night period aren’t as long as what was proposed for Dublin in the draft. Dublin’s night cap and movement limit period covered 11pm-7am while most airports night quotas cover from 11:30pm/12am - 5/6am. Most base aircraft return from 11pm and they depart from 6am. If you limit their flying hours from Dublin, the aircraft will be removed and bases elsewhere , having a knock on effect throughout the day.

    A strict night quota in operation from 11:30pm - 6am at Dublin that encourages newer aircraft during this period is the most realistic, balanced and fair approach for a capital city airport, that’s on an Island, at the edge of Europe, an hour behind most of Europe.

    Post edited by dublin12367 on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭davebuck


    My suggestions were noise quota between 23.59pm to 5.59am to encourage newer aircraft and a movement limit between the hours of 23.59pm and 5.30am, this should ensure the majority of base aircraft to return before midnight while allowing some to return after midnight and also allowing for cargo and early USA arrivals. The early departures would also be able to maintain their existing schedules which is vital for ourselves being an hour behind the majority of Europe.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 328 ✭✭jwm121


    Even during the winter at this point, arrivals go on till about 1:20 or 1:30am, Aer Lingus's last arrivals during the summer are 2am and TUI's Rhodes flight lands at 3:20am. There needs to be room for holiday flights to land at these late times for aircraft utilisation. This isn't something unique to Dublin either, it is no where near the level at the likes of Gatwick, Manchester, Madrid, Rome or Barcelona, some of which have holiday flights landing till about 4am, basically running a 24 hour operation. People seem to forget these airports when talking about airports with night caps, non of which are really comparable to Dublin. A quota, from 12am to 6am, with 28R/10L only closed during these hours, and with an incentive for quieter aircraft, wouldn't be as much of an issue. But to be honest the south runway has been operating the way it is now for years and there's been no complaints. I personally think there should not be a cap on that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,143 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    That bill was proposed and implemented already. The law exists. DAA can't are the ones to blame for the fact the airport is a local planning matter.

    That makes no sense. FCC are literally enforcement for planning law. The fact is the cap was breached, they have to act on that. They can't make up there own laws, so as soon as that residence group raised a formal complaint. FCC are legally obliged to issue it an enforcement notice.

    Even if the cap should have been resolved years ago, but DDA dragging out the application, and now FCC are dragging out the grant.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,143 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    100% This.

    Those councillors are active participants (maybe even a local TD) in the residents group. Sending they the same badly drafted copy and paste objetions.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,074 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Id agree that 11 to 7 is too broad and 12-6 would be more appropriate. I don't think any weight should be given to Aer Lingus or other airlines opinions on it though. If it was their choice, they'd run all night. Needs to be a balance to the social impact (not just noise and flights but also requiring more people to work stupid hours) of those hours imo. 12-6 imo should basically be reserved for emergencies and the early morning US flights that are coming in closer to 6 as they can be ahead of schedule at times.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,742 ✭✭✭Noxegon


    The early morning flights allow more use of the aircraft.

    Yesterday EI-DUZ arrived from New York at 4:25am. It then went to Malaga and back before departing for Boston at 4:45pm.

    It'd be much harder to do that sort of turn if they couldn't arrive so early.

    I develop Superior Solitaire when I'm not procrastinating on boards.ie.



Advertisement
Advertisement