Who actually wants the Dublin Airport passenger cap abolished?

I've seen lower figures (STR Smith Travel Research 7.7%), theres already organic growth to consume some of that increase. And people leaving construction every day.

Peak additional room construction was around 2500 p.a. (2023-2024). 2025 is projected as 1500.

How can room capacity possibly keep pace with such proposed huge increases in arrivals?

"Planners could give Dublin Airport the green light to handle 40 million passengers a year in coming months" - Kenny Jacobs in the times.

(dub gets roughly a 50-50 split on arrivals/departures, i've checked)

ROUGHLY. That would be ~8 million increase. Say ~4 million arrivals. ~800k per week maximum. Say 400k to be conservative.

10% conservative estimate for tourists. 40k tourists per week. Additional.

If 1/4 choose Dublin (again very conservative). 10k additional rooms needed at any point. City is building like 2000 p.a.

Occupancy already at 80%+. Peaks hitting 90%+.

So the bill for your room (best case scenario) if you're going to any event anywhere in Dublin, at any time into the near future, will be your first born.

Not a problem if you own an airline, Im sure.

Whatever way you choose to spin it a Dublin hotel room costs an arm and a leg and adding to demand will only help to keep it that way.

And no we can't build our way out of it fast enough.

But its okay, ignore that too, along with the lack of policing and a+e care, and the strained utilities and logjammed bureaucracy and overflowing prisons.

Lets focus on the positives. As you and your buddy have been doing all this time, laying out a delight filled selection of positive arguments on why this is a good thing.

You're not reduced to chasing me for 5 pages over a typo or just flat our ignoring the multiple areas of strain in the system.

No, no. Thats what someone without a valid list of positives would do. You however have a splenderous list of reasons as to why we should celebrate.

Such as ……… go on. lets hear them.

1: the m50s is operating above capacity. despite upgrades. countrys busiest road. and road capacity can't be sufficient. we're the 3rd most congested city in europe. this is now. presently

https://www.irishtimes.com/transport/2025/01/06/dublin-ranks-as-europes-third-most-congested-city-after-london-and-paris/

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/m50-motorway-or-carpark-how-irelands-busiest-route-is-at-breakdown-point/35155501.html (last major upgrades were made in 2010 prior to this article from 2016)

google, chatgpt, grok all confirm m50 operating above capacity.

2: hotel room shortages have occurred. google, grok, and chatgpt ai's report that yes there is a shortage. as does the media, and an bord pleanala in below links.

https://indublin.ie/travel/dublin-moves-to-ease-hotel-shortage-with-new-45-room-project/

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2023/0508/1382492-tourism-sector/

"There is a recognised shortage of accommodation in Dublin. Based on theiranalysis in 2023 there was a shortfall of 9,000 rooms and currently there are just over 24,000 hotel rooms in Dublin city with an estimated 3,500 coming on stream over thenext two years" -

https://www.pleanala.ie/anbordpleanala/media/abp/cases/reports/319/r319111.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com

page 14. (3.4.1)

there you go. the facts are ignorant again.

get salty at the facts.

Gatwick has had plans approved to expand, despite London being one of the most congested cities in europe.

Just because traffic at certain times on the M50 is busy does not mean that the city can't grow its traffic levels.

Dublin airport will expand its capacity and the country as a whole will benefit because of it.

What you told me in the course of our conversation, was that I was wrong about 2 issues. Do you recall.

1. road capacity is insufficient. 
2. no room for tourists.

these are what you disputed.

I have now proven to you without a shadow of a doubt that I was and am right on both counts.

By way of multiple references.

Our road capacity is insufficient. For present levels, any increases aside.

That there is a shortage of hotel rooms for tourists. For present levels, any increases aside.

This is not my opinion.

This is me pointing you towards the sources.

Media, govt and ai sources. Given to you.

And rejected again it seems.

The donkey refuses to drink.

M50 being occasionally busy is quite the understatement.

"…The M50 remains the busiest road in the network...…. June 29th is recorded as its busiest day in 2023 with 184,978 vehicles passing between the N2 and N3 exits.

The stretch of the M1 leading to the airport exit was the next most used stretch of road with 158,664 vehicles …"

Gatwick is 45k from London. That's like having an airport in Navan or Greystones or Drogheda.

Its bit ironic in thread which insists on Dublin Airport being the only option for all flights. To then give Gatwick as example when it's secondary hub that's not even in London.

wouldn't want that.

well you've certainly shown me in this thread. bye-good.

Its a 30 minute train ride from London Gatwick to Victoria.

Trains run every 15 mins and operate 24 hrs a day.

When we can get from Cork or Knock airport to Dublin city centre in 30 mins, at any time of the day and with a max wait time of 30 mins between trains, then expansion at those airports would be viable.

Ah yes - the denial of being angry, while starting with JFC and SFA

Swearing ≠ anger. You're confusing the two. You're also ignoring the fact that you accused me of being angry before I used those words.

But here again we have the myth that flying is "cheaper in the vast majority of cases", while your "vast majority of cases" is the incredibly narrow and unlikely scenario I've outlined.

What are you smoking? Flying to London is cheaper. Flying anywhere further than London is cheaper. Flying to most of the UK is cheaper than sail/rail. Before the time factor is even brought into the equation. This isn't an incredibly narrow and unlikely anything. This is 98% of the cities in the world we're talking about.

In fact, you yourself actually disproved your own point when you mentioned London City - but you've quietly ignored that now it doesn't suit your own argument since I showed you the price of a ticket there. Heathrow is also more expensive.

Anything submitted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. I haven't disproved anything. Saying so, without backing it up, is meaningless. Might as well be a fart in the wind. Heathrow is more expensive than some of the other airports, but it's still cheaper than sail/rail. Anyone denying this is being deliberately obtuse. Someone was comparing €59 one-way ferry tickets with return flights and they were still more expensive. Picking a random midweek in July, there are 7 or 8 flights available for less than €120 to Heathrow. If you change airport to Stansted they are all under €100. Ferry/train combo is more expensive, and, remember, we are talking about the UK here. Anywhere further afield and the price of the ferry shoots up, plus accommodation becomes a factor, plus all of that time that you have refused to factor into the equation.

4.5 million may fly to London each year - but how many do so for a day trip, to Stansted, with no baggage, not getting an onward transfer from the airport, not eating on the trip, at a time when prices are at the lowest?

The majority, I'd wager. The tenner for the Stansted express has been factored in for weeks at this stage, pretending it hasn't just shows how hollow your argument is.

So you haven't shown anything "time and again" - other than that you've picked a very narrow set of restrictions and deemed that "the vast majority of cases", because in other cases your argument doesn't actually hold.

You need to brush up on your reading comprehension. You keep using the word 'narrow' incorrectly. It is your own set of restrictions that are narrow, restricting your cheap fares to places that are closer to Dublin than London.

Then the food argument gets sillier each time - it's a proper internet "Dig up, stupid" moment now. You've quietly ignored your comment of free food at your destination, and now say your food is free because you're at home - but you're not at home? You're on a trip to London? i mean, if that's the hill you want to die on, I'll bring a packed lunch on the overland trip.

The food is free at home, after the trip, when I've returned back to home and you're still waiting on the 5hr train back to Holyhead.

You've not included the cost of the transfer from Stansted - you've talked about how overland is triple the cost of flying, which only works out when, in addition to the above limitations (no bags, etc), you also don't include the transfer price.

I'm blue in the face telling you that even with the tenner for the Stansted express that it's still cheaper. You've brought it up twice in this paragraph alone. Most people don't have checked luggage when flying to London. In fact, I've never done it and don't know anyone else who has.

The time comparison isn't 8 hours v 15 hours - again, I've shown you that. You were taking 30 minutes to get from the plane in Stansted to the city centre - but it's 80-90 minutes. Flying is still quicker, I'm not arguing that, but it's no reason for you to make up stuff, and stick to that even when I've shown it's wrong.

I'm not making anything up and you haven't shown anything to be wrong. Here it is again…..

Sailing:

30 mins before departure, 197 minutes ferry crossing (average), 30 mins transferring/waiting for train in Holyhead, 270 mins average train duration to London = 527 mins total, or 8hrs 47mins.

Flying:

2 hrs before departure, 85 minutes flying, 40 mins transferring/waiting for train, 48 mins train duration = 293 mins total, or 4hrs 53 mins.

Much quicker, especially when you get the slow ferry like you have to for a huge chunk of the year….even if you get the quicker ferry it's only about an hour quicker. If you drive instead of getting the train, as was suggested by you, it takes closer to 15hrs.

This is indisputable fact.

And indeed, if you're really so self-centred that your time is the only thing that concerns you, then that Wimbledon meeting should be a Zoom call. Everybody wins - definitely quicker, cheaper and less emissions.

I never said it's the only thing that matters, that's you making sh1t up again. I said it's a factor for everyone, whether they admit it or not. Time is a resource, one that has a value. Ignoring it to make your own, already-weak, argument look better doesn't change anything. Time and money are the two main factors for pretty much everyone when it comes to travelling, your own personal crusade aside. I agree on the zoom calls, it's outside of most peoples' controls when they are sent on a work trip.

You've also quietly ignored the other points I've called you up on, such as carbon emissions from a plane not being really known (not true), how I didn't show the comparison emissions for overland (not true), the free food at your destination (which I repeat because of how bizarre it is), and so on.

No, I haven't. Carbon emissions aren't really known. There is a rough estimate, but that's it. You can tell me what the estimated amount of emissions saved is, but not an exact one. You don't know the figures involved, in either mode of transport, only what a rough guide is. Each flight is different, uses different volumes of fuel etc. But I didn't ignore this, I already said it to you. The free food also hasn’t been ignored. Remember the ‘I’m already at home’ part that confused you earlier? How am I ignoring it when I mentioned that? They weren't ignored, you picked it up wrong, but that's on you.

And speaking of ignoring things…………….what do you do when you want/need to travel to Greece? Or Iceland? The Azores, the Balearics, Canaries, Madeira, Malta? And wasn't the ferry terminal closed for a few months after a storm recently? And what about how you accused me of being angry then, when asked for evidence, you used a post that had been posted after you made the accusation in the first place? You've abandoned that pretty sharpish, wonder why?

A SailRail ticket is comparable in price to flying in all but the extreme edge cases such as you've flagged.

No it's not. It's only comparable IN those extreme edge cases and in every other example it's much, much more expensive, once you factor in the extra-curricular stuff.

I'll tell you what. You pick anywhere outside the UK or Ireland and show how much the ferry/train/driving is, and I'll show you how much cheaper it is to fly, once everything is factored in. In fact, if you can find ANYWHERE that is further away than London/northern France that is consistently cheaper than flying then I'll donate €50 to a charity of your choosing. Remember, I'm talking about every city in mainland Europe here, and this is what you're calling 'narrow restrictions'?

https://ittn.ie/travel-news/etihad-to-expand-dublin-abu-dhabi-route-to-double-daily-service-next-april/

Ethiad told the cap was no issue... increase capacity...

Dispute? I haven't been addressing you for a whole page, other than try to get rid of you. Please go away.

I ignored the 5 year timeline? No, I didn't. I just haven't addressed timelines in depth. I don't write a full thesis on every related aspect. This is you looking for something, coming up with nothing, and then inventing something.

I had considered timelines of development and demand, I just didn't dig into it because its all very speculative and subject to sorts of unforeseens (planning, staffing, wage inflation).

(Although the conflicting timelines of hotel requirements vs construction shortages were mentioned in passing).

Getting into projected competing timelines would take research, and astrofool would ignore the supplied links and evidence in any case. Work with no thanks.

Nor do I expect others to dig into everything I mention. For example I mentioned lack of policing, and planning logjams, and shortage of construction staff, you can now add shortage of hospitality staff too. These all relate to capacity to deal with more arrivals.

I don't take it that you've actively ignored these points, running from them out of fear of being shown up. I just think you haven't been arsed. (thankfully). They're there if you want to address them now btw (for yourself, not involving me tyvm), but I won't chase you about them and get all salty and wound up if you're too busy.

No, I don't think it will be possible to add an extra 200 rooms p.a. on top of whats already needed, theres a huge construction shortage in housing, and thats what will be prioritized.

We've had a hotel room shortage for quite a number of years and it hasn't been resolved in any of those years. So why now all of a sudden.

The annual average construction of hotel rooms for Dublin has been around 1,600 over the past 3 years. And 1320, over 5 years when covid years are excluded (2017, 2018, 2019, 2023, 2024). Averages.

So adding 200 rooms we'd need a 12.5% increase (3 year reference).

Or 15.5% using a 5 year reference (ex covid). Just say 14% above typical norm. For 2026.

I don't believe thats possible.

"I said I haven't disputed the hotel shortage."

I know. I was telling you that there is no dispute on hotel spaces between you and I for the last page. Other than me trying to get away from your ever-expanding swamp of text. I was speaking with someone else, trying to remove your meandering pointless digressions from my life.

If "The 200 rooms isn't on top of the 1500-2500 we build a year. It's already included in those numbers." Well then thats even worse if trying to increase arrivals since that rate has already led only to insufficient capacity. I had been giving the benefit of the doubt. Turns out its worse again. We're keeping the present failing average. As well as not adding 200 on top. lol.

"an entire show of you very intelligent calculations"

Indeed. Your 1 moment in this thread. Not a promotion of why more arrivals is good, not a positive contribution to the topic, but just finding an error to indulge in. In one of my very many fair points about how this issue has another side to the story.

All of the categories related to increased tourism which I mentioned as having insufficiencies absolutely do. Anyone reading this can verify themselves.

"Of the following categories related to Dublin city, how many are insufficient or operating above capacity. 1 - hotel accommodation capacity. 2 - public transport. 3 - policing. 4 - hospital a&e. 5 - construction worker capacity. 6 - student accommodation capacity. 7 - emergency accommodation."

Just copy paste that into Google dear reader.

Or Chatgpt. Or Grok.