Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

Brendan Bendar · 06-12-2020 4:00pm

trellheim wrote: »

I think OP is referring to hard braking on 28L to get one of the early exits which I've never seen myself

Kinda guessed that but what has that got to do with “those dwelling in T2”

Still a bit puzzled on that one.

Can understand that taxi time can ‘influence ‘ turnaround time ‘ but surely trying to cut ‘ground time ‘ to the kind of limit which builds in an expectation that crew have to grease the machine onto the concrete and get a rw exit as early as poss to minimize block time is not too sensible.

The long haulers would have a more generous turnaround time standard, I’m led to believe.

EchoIndia · 06-12-2020 4:15pm

trellheim wrote: »

I think OP is referring to hard braking on 28L to get one of the early exits which I've never seen myself

Not done often by Ryanair, from my observations.

basill · 06-12-2020 4:52pm

trellheim wrote: »

I think OP is referring to hard braking on 28L to get one of the early exits which I've never seen myself

Nope give me a straight line any day. Slowing to go through a series of chicanes ain't my idea of fun.

goingnowhere · 06-12-2020 6:03pm

Getting off at E5 as it was on 28 was great fun on a late evening arrival

I can recall coming in one evening and vacated at E5, the previous lander had gone to E6 or further down and had to give way to us as we vacated so we got to gate before.

Brendan Bendar · 06-12-2020 6:06pm

goingnowhere wrote: »

Getting off at E5 as it was on 28 was great fun on a late evening arrival

I can recall coming in one evening and vacated at E5, the previous lander had gone to E6 or further down and had to give way to us as we vacated so we got to gate before.

Coming in half empty obviously.:o

06-12-2020 7:14pm

EchoIndia wrote: »

Not done often by Ryanair, from my observations.

Hard braking increases the brake temperature, and the allowance needed for cooling down would compromise a 25 minute turnaround. That's why, if you ever experience a rejected take off and the brakes are applied hard, the aircraft can't just join the back of the take off queue again, but it returns to stand (usually)

06-12-2020 7:21pm

goingnowhere wrote: »

Getting off at E5 as it was on 28 was great fun on a late evening arrival

I can recall coming in one evening and vacated at E5, the previous lander had gone to E6 or further down and had to give way to us as we vacated so we got to gate before.

That's right. Just to be a picky b@stard, the taxiways have recently been re-designated Sierra, instead of Echo, in prep for the parallel runway (where the taxiways are November and Mike) and taxiways that used to be Hotel etc to the west of Runway 16/34 are mostly now Whiskey. North, East, South and West kind of idea. The Foxtrots will become Echo in due course.

Useful chart here

http://iaip.iaa.ie/iaip/Published%20Files/AIP%20Files/AD/Chart%20Files/EIDW/EI_AD_2_EIDW_24-1_en.pdf

Brendan Bendar · 06-12-2020 7:39pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Hard braking increases the brake temperature, and the allowance needed for cooling down would compromise a 25 minute turnaround. That's why, if you ever experience a rejected take off and the brakes are applied hard, the aircraft can't just join the back of the take off queue again, but it returns to stand (usually)

Wouldn’t be that hard rob, in my opinion, on a ‘normal’ landing, but you are correct and right on the other observation.

Fcukers would be red hot after an RTO.

Would need to be left alone for a while.Cool down as naturally as possible.

reforger · 08-12-2020 7:54pm

The issue mentioned upthread was resolved today.

" A man has agreed before the High Court to vacate land next to Dublin Airport which is required to facilitate the construction of the new north runway."

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/man-agrees-before-high-court-to-vacate-land-needed-for-runway-at-dublin-airport-1.4431085?mode=amp

Hotblack Desiato · 09-12-2020 5:34pm

Paid off by the sound of it :rolleyes:

Brendan Bendar · 09-12-2020 5:43pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Paid off by the sound of it :rolleyes:

Ooohhh......... sssstttteady..

PinOnTheRight · 09-12-2020 7:06pm

Not sure if this will post correctly but the IAA tweeted a cool picture today of the new tower poking above the fog.

https://twitter.com/iaapress/status/1336044781642915846?s=21

Jamie2k9 · 18-12-2020 2:06pm

https://www.dublinairport.com/latest-news/2020/12/18/daa-seeks-amendments-to-north-runway-s-mode-of-operation

daa Seeks Amendments To North Runway’s Mode Of Operation

Under the planning application:
* New noise quota system between 23.30-06.00
* N Runway only operational between 06.00-00.00
* Sound proofing grands of 20,000 for an extra 350 homes

Seems like a reasonable compromise.

smurfjed · 21-12-2020 5:24am

That's why, if you ever experience a rejected take off and the brakes are applied hard, the aircraft can't just join the back of the take off queue again, but it returns to stand (usually)

I would be surprised if the aircraft got as far as the apron before the fuse plugs melted.

Brendan Bendar · 22-12-2020 9:58am

smurfjed wrote: »

I would be surprised if the aircraft got as far as the apron before the fuse plugs melted.

Yep.... send for the tug.....after an appropriate inspection and stuff.

Lot of energy converted into heat in these ,happily rare, events.

Brendan Bendar · 30-12-2020 11:48am

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Yep.... send for the tug.....after an appropriate inspection and stuff.

Lot of energy converted into heat in these ,happily rare, events.

https://northrunway.exhibition.app/

Probably a lot of people may have seen this but maybe some interested people here an on the thread may not.

Sorry if it’s been posted before...

davepatr07 · 09-01-2021 12:20am

Any one hear anymore about DAA's appeal to lift some of the conditions for the operation of North Runway? Allowing flights from 6am instead of 7am etc...

and what's the chances they will succeed in their appeal?

Tks

Dave

09-01-2021 6:44am

davepatr07 wrote: »

Any one hear anymore about DAA's appeal to lift some of the conditions for the operation of North Runway? Allowing flights from 6am instead of 7am etc...

and what's the chances they will succeed in their appeal?

Tks

Dave

https://www.fingal.ie/news/anca-commences-assessment-aircraft-noise-dublin-airport

Long process has started.

donkey balls · 10-01-2021 12:23am

I haven't been out the airport direction in a while so was wondering about the new layout of the road where the new Rwy is, I noticed the fencing they have up has a green panel half way up blocking the view of the RWY and ramp area
Compared to the fencing that runs alongside RWY 10/28.

Brendan Bendar · 10-01-2021 8:11am

donkey balls wrote: »

I haven't been out the airport direction in a while so was wondering about the new layout of the road where the new Rwy is, I noticed the fencing they have up has a green panel half way up blocking the view of the RWY and ramp area
Compared to the fencing that runs alongside RWY 10/28.

Apparently to discourage ‘rubber neckers’ is one of the reasons,apart from of course enhanced security.

markpb · 10-01-2021 2:46pm

donkey balls wrote: »

I haven't been out the airport direction in a while so was wondering about the new layout of the road where the new Rwy is, I noticed the fencing they have up has a green panel half way up blocking the view of the RWY and ramp area
Compared to the fencing that runs alongside RWY 10/28.

I could be wrong but I thought there was a plan to build dedicated spotting areas along the new runway? Perhaps the fences are to discourage people from spotting at other parts of the runway.

Bussywussy · 10-01-2021 6:40pm

markpb wrote: »

I could be wrong but I thought there was a plan to build dedicated spotting areas along the new runway? Perhaps the fences are to discourage people from spotting at other parts of the runway.

There is 2 built , thankfully those fences are in place,its a busy,narrow section of road that requires concentration not looking at airplanes.

EchoIndia · 10-01-2021 7:03pm

Bussywussy wrote: »

There is 2 built , thankfully those fences are in place,its a busy,narrow section of road that requires concentration not looking at airplanes.

Indeed, though whoever thought that putting the dedicated areas in the chosen locations north of the runway may not have taken into account the requirements of the more serious "watchers" of aviation.

RadioRetro · 03-02-2021 5:44pm

New in the courts.

https://twitter.com/courtsnewsIRL/status/1357005870169812998

Brendan Bendar · 03-02-2021 6:00pm

No surprise there.

Area looks ridiculous...... the lads with the striped trews got their claws in there.

The taxpayer will of course pay out to some undeserving cause.

RadioRetro · 03-02-2021 6:03pm

RTE News piece on the court case:

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0203/1194878-court-daa-runway/

Brendan Bendar · 03-02-2021 6:13pm

RadioRetro wrote: »

RTE News piece on the court case:

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0203/1194878-court-daa-runway/

Incredible is all I can say.......

IngazZagni · 03-02-2021 6:23pm

A complete farce. A big payday for the legal profession and a payout and/or expensive new facilities being provided to the MacAleer family all at the expense of us plebs, the general taxpayer. A lot of incompetence from Fingal coco too.

Brendan Bendar · 03-02-2021 6:45pm

IngazZagni wrote: »

A complete farce. A big payday for the legal profession and a payout and/or expensive new facilities being provided to the MacAleer family all at the expense of us plebs, the general taxpayer. A lot of incompetence from Fingal coco too.

How in the name of **** could the idiots , whoever they were, allow this scenario to become the issue it is now.

This project has been in the planning for at least 10 years, the situation with the family should have been sorted and wrapped up years ago.

Why in ***** name has it dragged on when the lead in time was way more than adequate to sort out ,and the issue wasn’t copper fastened with contracts which ensured that a situation like this would not arise.

I think I know...... it’s taxpayers money , there’s no accountability for that.

I will be raising it with my constituency reps.

Larbre34 · 03-02-2021 9:34pm

I would hazard a guess they may already be aware of it Brennar ffs.

Nijmegen · 03-02-2021 11:20pm

The legal profession are adept at dragging things out. Look for sight of documents like the construction contract that at first glance you’d wonder why it had any relation to a notice to quit. The folks sitting in situ have all the time in the world, DAA have a deadline to meet. Drag your feet, juice the size of the settlement cheque. It’s probably not a DAA screw up per se, it’s just that our legal system is designed for these drag out proceedings.

Larbre34 · 04-02-2021 12:04am

I don't see it mentioned, the latest update of Google Maps shows the runway in an advanced state of construction, certainly enough to show the updated Airport footprint very clearly.

Brendan Bendar · 04-02-2021 12:16am

Larbre34 wrote: »

I would hazard a guess they may already be aware of it Brennar ffs.

Sure they are but what are they doing about it.

Brendan Bendar · 04-02-2021 12:20am

Larbre34 wrote: »

I don't see it mentioned, the latest update of Google Maps shows the runway in an advanced state of construction, certainly enough to show the updated Airport footprint very clearly.

You don’t see what mentioned, Lar...?

If it’s the halting site, it’s still there at the threshold of 28R.

Larbre34 · 04-02-2021 1:56am

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

You don’t see what mentioned, Lar...?

If it’s the halting site, it’s still there at the threshold of 28R.

No, the fact that google maps has been updated to show the runway.

On the halting site issue, what influence do you expect local representatives will have on a court case over land and leases between a commercial semi-state body and the executive of a local authority?

I'll not keep you in suspense, its none. So they know about it, but can and will do absolutely nothing. The court case will run its course unless the Fingal executive clear the site in the meantime.

Brendan Bendar · 04-02-2021 4:30am

Larbre34 wrote: »

No, the fact that google maps has been updated to show the runway.

On the halting site issue, what influence do you expect local representatives will have on a court case over land and leases between a commercial semi-state body and the executive of a local authority?

I'll not keep you in suspense, its none. So they know about it, but can and will do absolutely nothing. The court case will run its course unless the Fingal executive clear the site in the meantime.

I expect that who ever is responsible for ,pending a court case ,if the taxpayer is exposed , they will be out of a job.

prunudo · 04-02-2021 6:46am

Larbre34 wrote: »

I don't see it mentioned, the latest update of Google Maps shows the runway in an advanced state of construction, certainly enough to show the updated Airport footprint very clearly.

Weird scrolling around and not seeing a plane parked up or a car park full. A ghost town and a sad sign of the times. Looks like 16/34 is also out of action.

LXFlyer · 04-02-2021 7:58am

prunudo wrote: »

Weird scrolling around and not seeing a plane parked up or a car park full. A ghost town and a sad sign of the times. Looks like 16/34 is also out of action.

That has more to do with the Google algorithm that is removing static objects (such as aircraft and vehicles) from Google Earth.

If you switch between google earth and the normal satellite view on a laptop (by clicking on the globe) you'll see aircraft (and vehicles on the M1/M50 for example) magically reappearing.

prunudo · 04-02-2021 8:08am

LXFlyer wrote: »

That has more to do with the Google algorithm that is removing static objects (such as aircraft and vehicles) from Google Earth.

If you switch between google earth and the normal satellite view on a laptop (by clicking on the globe) you'll see aircraft (and vehicles on the M1/M50 for example) magically reappearing.

Oh, didn't know that. Thought it was a bit odd not to even see a few parked up.
Especially as there are buses in the terminus behind the multi storey carpark.

L1011 · 04-02-2021 9:24am

The removal of planes and boats has removed the Jeanie Johnston and the Cill Airne floating pub from the Liffey too, its a rather odd decision

Nijmegen · 04-02-2021 11:30am

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Sure they are but what are they doing about it.

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I expect that who ever is responsible for ,pending a court case ,if the taxpayer is exposed , they will be out of a job.

Would that be the Minister for Transport who granted a license in the 1980s or the person in DAA who issued a notice to quit in 2017, 4 years lead-time before the runway was due to come into operation?

I just don't see the connection here to "somebody's head should be on a plate" - you might as well pick whoever made the decision in 1922 to stick with a common law system that creates endless scope for due process to drag on and makes decisions a lottery built on a house of case law cards.

The runway project was put back on the cards in 2016, the notice to quit came in 2017, Fingal haven't managed to get the travelers to move on and they are exercising their legal rights in our system to drag the whole thing out. Short of saying that pending appeals in the High Court somebody should just go down with a bulldozer and run them over I'm not quite sure what you're looking for.

Brendan Bendar · 04-02-2021 1:17pm

Nijmegen wrote: »

Would that be the Minister for Transport who granted a license in the 1980s or the person in DAA who issued a notice to quit in 2017, 4 years lead-time before the runway was due to come into operation?

I just don't see the connection here to "somebody's head should be on a plate" - you might as well pick whoever made the decision in 1922 to stick with a common law system that creates endless scope for due process to drag on and makes decisions a lottery built on a house of case law cards.

The runway project was put back on the cards in 2016, the notice to quit came in 2017, Fingal haven't managed to get the travelers to move on and they are exercising their legal rights in our system to drag the whole thing out. Short of saying that pending appeals in the High Court somebody should just go down with a bulldozer and run them over I'm not quite sure what you're looking for.

You won’t drag me down that bulldozer rabbit hole Mr N.

What I am looking for is that the taxpayer is not exposed to significant costs in the resolving of this issue.

If the legal situation is as you say, and I have no reason to believe it’s not, then someone in ‘charge’ should introduce legislation to co er these situations.

We had an issue down in Tipp where a group were bargaining reportedly with councils for stables and grazing for animals.

And all this whilst the honest taxpayer starting off is finding it almost impossible to purchase a modest house.

What I’m looking for is an end to this kind of fcukkherry and fair play for the taxpayer.

Not too much to ask for surely.

apologies for going a bit off topic but the issue does have a ‘once removed’
connection.

Larbre34 · 04-02-2021 3:44pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

What I’m looking for is an end to this kind of fcukkherry and fair play for the taxpayer.

Not too much to ask for surely.

Lol.

And on the expectation of someone losing their job over it? Double lol.

Brendan Bendar · 04-02-2021 4:05pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

Lol.

And on the expectation of someone losing their job over it? Double lol.

I don’t know what kind of comment that was Lar, but seems to me either that kind of outcome is foreign to you, or you’re being cynical.

I cannot decide which.

Nijmegen · 04-02-2021 4:32pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

You won’t drag me down that bulldozer rabbit hole Mr N.

What I am looking for is that the taxpayer is not exposed to significant costs in the resolving of this issue.

If the legal situation is as you say, and I have no reason to believe it’s not, then someone in ‘charge’ should introduce legislation to co er these situations.

We had an issue down in Tipp where a group were bargaining reportedly with councils for stables and grazing for animals.

And all this whilst the honest taxpayer starting off is finding it almost impossible to purchase a modest house.

What I’m looking for is an end to this kind of fcukkherry and fair play for the taxpayer.

Not too much to ask for surely.

apologies for going a bit off topic but the issue does have a ‘once removed’
connection.

I go back to my point about our common law system, so. There isn't a law that can be introduced in the land save perhaps a constitutional amendment (and those can be dodgy and have unintended consequences) that cannot be challenged in court. Governments of late have tried to introduce all sorts of things like "strategic development zoning" type laws that still got dragged into the courts (and in some cases, saw developments with permission struck down) because you can't just write a law that says "Ignoring all these other laws and all that precedent in law, we are going to do this now." In particular anything that gets near the right to a dwelling, which is protected in the constitution (see, unintended consequences, bet nobody thought that would stop someone building a runway).

To the substance of the matter re Dublin Airport infrastructure, the parties involved know DAA is on a deadline and there's a fair chance longer they can stretch it out in legal arguments (that may eventually actually end in DAAs favour, just after their deadline) the bigger the settlement will be.

Screaming for people to be fired won't really change the underlying fundamental nature of our legal system. It's just a cost of doing business in Ireland.

Brendan Bendar · 04-02-2021 5:03pm

Nijmegen wrote: »

I go back to my point about our common law system, so. There isn't a law that can be introduced in the land save perhaps a constitutional amendment (and those can be dodgy and have unintended consequences) that cannot be challenged in court. Governments of late have tried to introduce all sorts of things like "strategic development zoning" type laws that still got dragged into the courts (and in some cases, saw developments with permission struck down) because you can't just write a law that says "Ignoring all these other laws and all that precedent in law, we are going to do this now." In particular anything that gets near the right to a dwelling, which is protected in the constitution (see, unintended consequences, bet nobody thought that would stop someone building a runway).

To the substance of the matter re Dublin Airport infrastructure, the parties involved know DAA is on a deadline and there's a fair chance longer they can stretch it out in legal arguments (that may eventually actually end in DAAs favour, just after their deadline) the bigger the settlement will be.

Screaming for people to be fired won't really change the underlying fundamental nature of our legal system. It's just a cost of doing business in Ireland.

I don’t doubt that you are correct,and indeed one wonders why this wasn’t tackled years before now, years ago.

That’s what has me so riled.

Why would this not have been addressed years ago rather than wait until the last minute metaphorically speaking and then the time constraint wouldn’t be on the DAA.

I note that Forest Little G. C lost some land adjacent to the boundary road.

There was no problem there it would appear.

Did Forrest little own that land.

Do the good people in the halting site own the land
Who provided the accommodation, who serviced it, who is the legal owner.
I presume the people will be rehoused.

I don’t expect you to know all that, but I think it’s only fair that the taxpayer be concerned about to what would appear on paper anyway to be a fleecing operation of significant proportions.

Unless of course DAA win the case, which from my limited experience doesn’t happen too often without a significant ‘sweetener’.being trousered.

Larbre34 · 04-02-2021 5:25pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I don’t know what kind of comment that was Lar, but seems to me either that kind of outcome is foreign to you, or you’re being cynical.

I cannot decide which.

Both.

Its never happened before, so its not going to happen now.

I'd point you to the current situation where Teachers Unions are deciding when and when not, special needs schools will be open during the current crisis.

The Unions are all powerful, individual public servants are never held personally to account, certainly not over something as trivial and local as this halting site not being vacated on time.

Brendan Bendar · 04-02-2021 5:49pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

Both.

Its never happened before, so its not going to happen now.

I'd point you to the current situation where Teachers Unions are deciding when and when not, special needs schools will be open during the current crisis.

The Unions are all powerful, individual public servants are never held personally to account, certainly not over something as trivial and local as this halting site not being vacated on time.

Thanks Lar, understand your point of view.

Tenger · 04-02-2021 11:58pm

Let all take a deep breath and remember this is a thread about Dublin new runway and infrastructure

A320 · 09-02-2021 2:43pm

The approach lights for 10L have also been installed

Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

Comments