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 all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
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

Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

12357186

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    Aphex wrote: »
    Where are you living? The south of Cork?

    Why drive through the city? You do know that you can get off the M50 less than 5 minutes away from Dublin Airport?

    Try it at rush hour - if you're flying at 10am you have to be there at 9, which means you hit rush hour unless you leave before it. Normally I get the 16 bus to the airport.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 653 ✭✭✭Aphex


    Well, the bus would take a lot longer I suppose. Wasn't thinking about that, apologies.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,342 ✭✭✭markpb


    Oh, I don't know; Shannon does ok.

    Shannon carried 1.4m pax last year. Dublin carries more than that each month. They're not in the same league at all. And that's before I point out that Shannon is not a second city airport so I'm not sure how it's relevant.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,538 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Try it at rush hour - if you're flying at 10am you have to be there at 9, which means you hit rush hour unless you leave before it. Normally I get the 16 bus to the airport.

    If you're expecting a bus direct from south Dublin to Casement as a minor secondary airport, you'll have another thing coming... could be even longer at rush hour.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    markpb wrote: »
    Shannon carried 1.4m pax last year. Dublin carries more than that each month. They're not in the same league at all. And that's before I point out that Shannon is not a second city airport so I'm not sure how it's relevant.

    I wasn't making a comparison - someone said planes wouldn't fly from a smaller airport to where I want to go. My comparison with Shannon was of where the planes fly.
    MYOB wrote: »
    If you're expecting a bus direct from south Dublin to Casement as a minor secondary airport, you'll have another thing coming... could be even longer at rush hour.

    Well, yes, I'd expect a bus to go to an airport used by the people of the city. It would just mean an extra little leg on the Clondalkin route.


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


    Must we drag this off topic into a second airport debate?

    It's not happening. Not any time in the near future.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,538 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Well, yes, I'd expect a bus to go to an airport used by the people of the city. It would just mean an extra little leg on the Clondalkin route.

    And require you to go to the city centre to get on to said bus. Not saving you any time at all.

    Anyway, you thinking, most likely inaccurately, that you could save a little time does not justify the multiple millions required or the almost inevitable actual loss of service a second airport would cause.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    MYOB wrote: »
    And require you to go to the city centre to get on to said bus. Not saving you any time at all.

    Anyway, you thinking, most likely inaccurately, that you could save a little time does not justify the multiple millions required or the almost inevitable actual loss of service a second airport would cause.

    I wasn't primarily thinking of myself or other Dublin westsiders; I was primarily thinking of country folk. But as Nimrod says, this is thread creep. Back onto the new-runway subject.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭notharrypotter


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    based on 8% per annum compound growth based on 20,200,000 (2013 figure) we would hit that number at the end of 2016 it would be 25,5 million... It would be good if the cork route was reinstated, would speed things up...
    The figure they use is 3% not 8%


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,853 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    the figure of 3% is total BS! The May figures and year to date ones will be announced shortly, I think it is running at close to 10% growth so far this year... ok so according to the below, it was 7% up to and including April, this was before a few new route launches etc, will be interesting to see May figures...

    http://www.dublinairport.com/gns/at-the-airport/latest-news/14-05-09/1_8_Million_Passengers_In_April_At_Dublin_Airport.aspx

    Almost 5.9 million passengers have travelled through Dublin Airport in the first four months of this year, a 7% increase over the same period last year.


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


    Their passenger numbers forecasts use Irish GDP growth forecasts by the IMF and assumes passenger number growth will be 1.15 times greater than GDP growth.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,754 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    the figure of 3% is total BS! The May figures and year to date ones will be announced shortly, I think it is running at close to 10% growth so far this year... ok so according to the below, it was 7% up to and including April, this was before a few new route launches etc, will be interesting to see May figures...

    http://www.dublinairport.com/gns/at-the-airport/latest-news/14-05-09/1_8_Million_Passengers_In_April_At_Dublin_Airport.aspx

    Almost 5.9 million passengers have travelled through Dublin Airport in the first four months of this year, a 7% increase over the same period last year.

    I think 2014 has being under estimated however they will be revised in September before the final charges are decided however a 2020 start for runway won't change at all IMO we are not going to see the growth rate of mid 2000's it will be back at early 2000 levels which was between 3 and 5% pa.

    I don't see the issue for the second runway as there is lots of capacity available from 28 and as we can see the IAA are increasing it in 3 phases.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,853 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,780 ✭✭✭jamo2oo9


    How many new routes are being launched in Dublin this year? I know Westjet is starting TA flights from St. Johns in two weeks and Ryanair launched a few routes earlier in the year due to the abolishment of the Air Passenger Tax. Have we got any more routes to be launched, particularly in the Middle-East as in increased frequencies?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Well Emirates are adding a second daily flight to/from Dubai from September, and Etihad are expanding to two daily flights to/from Abu Dhabi from July (currently one is six days a week and the second is four).


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,780 ✭✭✭jamo2oo9


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Well Emirates are adding a second flight to/from Dubai from July.

    I thought they did that last year no?

    EDIT: Turns out they didn't. I don't know why I thought it had already happened last year..

    http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/236712/etihad-follows-emirates-in-boosting-dublin-frequency/

    Both Emirates and Etihad are increasing their frequencies to Dubai and Abu Dhabi to two flights daily from Dublin


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    jamo2oo9 wrote: »
    I thought they did that last year no?


    No - you're thinking of Etihad and even that wasn't every day.


    It's actually September that Emirates are starting - I've edited my post above.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,853 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,068 ✭✭✭LoonyLovegood


    With the figures so far, there's a big possibility that it'll hit 20m this year, there's still the two busiest holiday months to go.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    CTYIgirl wrote: »
    With the figures so far, there's a big possibility that it'll hit 20m this year, there's still the two busiest holiday months to go.

    It did that last year 20,100,000

    This year will be a bumper year. BA adding city 10 extra flights per day mon-fri and Flybe adding 8 plus Inverness. 5% = 1,000,000 7%=1,400,000 or 21,100,000 or 21.5 million +.


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


    And UAE flights are going from 17 return flights a week to 28. I think that's 1 777 and 10 A330s more per week. Granted, it's only starting July and September.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,754 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Nimr wrote: »
    And UAE flights are going from 17 return flights a week to 28. I think that's 1 777 and 10 A330s more per week. Granted, it's only starting July and September.

    Filling them is a different story, we know EY were just following EK with the extra few flights.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,780 ✭✭✭jamo2oo9


    I wouldn't be holding my breath for the pax numbers this year but rather next year when these routes are flown for the full year. It'll be on the rise this year indeed but how much will it rise next year when the airlines are flying the new routes/expansions for a full year. Most of the new routes this year were introduced from April onwards. We're missing out 3 months and they could mean a lot when it comes to PAX numbers.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    Filling them is a different story, we know EY were just following EK with the extra few flights.

    Even if both achieve 50% or 75% load factor that's a significant number of pax.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,754 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Even if both achieve 50% or 75% load factor that's a significant number of pax.

    I think Emirates will see some growth EY won't.

    EY added a B777 around May 2013 and for the whole of 2013 they could of carried the same amount of passengers + around 20,000 more by not changing from their 10 weekly A330. Now they are going to add a further 4 weekly A330 service and as 2013 capacity growth had zero effect on their market, I don't see much change in 2014. BTW I have not being following 2014 numbers but expect its steady growth however the extra capacity is not needed. They are only doing to to keep up with EK.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1 jamroll12


    What I don't really understand is why Ryanair seem to reject it so strongly? DAA says that they'll need 25 million passengers going through Dublin before it would be feasible to build it, I assumed that 25 million passengers would give them enough money per annum to build the runway, so they wouldn't need to bring in extra charges for passengers to fund it?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,068 ✭✭✭LoonyLovegood


    It's probably because during the boom the DAA said that it'd only need 23.5m passengers. Considering how much the cost of building has declined, the increase in passenger numbers requirement makes no sense.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,342 ✭✭✭markpb


    jamroll12 wrote: »
    What I don't really understand is why Ryanair seem to reject it so strongly? DAA says that they'll need 25 million passengers going through Dublin before it would be feasible to build it, I assumed that 25 million passengers would give them enough money per annum to build the runway, so they wouldn't need to bring in extra charges for passengers to fund it?

    Ryanair would issue a press release about the opening of an envelope if they thought it would give them some free publicity.

    Secondly, no matter how many passengers go through the airport, any capital projects will be paid for by the passengers in charges passed on by the airlines so it's in Ryanairs interests to keep those charges as low as possible. No capital projects should (in theory) mean lower handling charges for Ryanair.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭notharrypotter


    Considering how much the cost of building has declined, the increase in passenger numbers requirement makes no sense.
    Greater efficiency in operations mean that current infrastructure can cater for more than initially envisaged.

    Hence the CAR sees the revised figure as more cost effective.
    What I don't really understand is why Ryanair seem to reject it so strongly
    No capital projects should (in theory) mean lower handling charges for Ryanair.
    I agree Ryanair's operations do not envisage the need so they simply don't want to pay what they would perceive as a subsidy to another operator.
    .


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,853 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    2.3 million passengers in July, 6% increase year on year in July, 7% year to date v 2013...

    http://www.dublinairport.com/gns/at-the-airport/latest-news/14-08-07/Over_2_3_Million_Passengers_In_July_At_Dublin_Airport.aspx

    if the 7% growth continues, looking at about 21.6 million this year.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    2.3 million passengers in July, 6% increase year on year in July, 7% year to date v 2013...

    http://www.dublinairport.com/gns/at-the-airport/latest-news/14-08-07/Over_2_3_Million_Passengers_In_July_At_Dublin_Airport.aspx

    if the 7% growth continues, looking at about 21.6 million this year.

    The rate the growth of transfers and US traffic is growing the end of 2015 could see 23m and the trigger for the parallel will be hit by end of 2017 if growth continues.

    But I foresee a shift in the problem from the runway to wide body stands by the summer next year. As a result there will be an issue with narrow body stands as every wide body at T2 takes up two narrow. As has happened recently to Americans Chicago flight it got delayed 3hrs out of the US and then lost it's stand here and got delayed another hour at least waiting for a another wide body stand.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,555 ✭✭✭kub


    What is it about this God forsaken country and forward planning?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,853 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    We either have hopeless idiots on serious money who are beyond incompetent or they have discovered there is far more money in getting it wrong and constantly righting it...


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You'll either get told you are wasting money or told you are being over optimistic about traffic growth.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,538 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    You'll either get told you are wasting money or told you are being over optimistic about traffic growth.

    And be denounced repeatedly by Michael O'Leary, who at least half the country seem convinced is the arbiter of all truth in the world.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,929 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    kub wrote: »
    What is it about this God forsaken country and forward planning?

    Ah yes, the infamous statements about T2 being "un-needed for the country" and "too large"


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    MYOB wrote: »
    And be denounced repeatedly by Michael O'Leary, who at least half the country seem convinced is the arbiter of all truth in the world.

    The cries of "put him in charge of the HSE he'll sort it out", yes the HSE where you would pay for oxygen and have to put in 50c to charge the paddles before they use them on you !


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 911 ✭✭✭steve-o


    Tenger wrote: »
    Ah yes, the infamous statements about T2 being "un-needed for the country" and "too large"
    In fairness, there were plenty of others saying that it was being built in the wrong place with almost no room for expansion, and destroyed a fairly new and expensive pier (6 gates?) in the process. Proof that Aer Rianta / DAA have never been good on future vision.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,813 ✭✭✭chrysagon


    last time i was in T2 was 2 weeks ago, and unlike what michael o Leary said, it is needed... and we need foresight, we have planners in this country who are willing to let housing estates be built on flood plains, but reject even the mere thought of another runway for the future!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 600 ✭✭✭Dublinflyer


    steve-o wrote: »
    In fairness, there were plenty of others saying that it was being built in the wrong place with almost no room for expansion, and destroyed a fairly new and expensive pier (6 gates?) in the process. Proof that Aer Rianta / DAA have never been good on future vision.

    There is a bit of room there for expansion in the check in building, the foundations are in place already, you just can't see them. The baggage handling collector belt was also built with expansion in mind and can be added onto easily and the back end can handle the capacity of the extra check in desks. There is also the land and plans for extra stands, a new pier. Now, how long it would take to build these and what would trigger the build is another thing, and the minor detail of paying for them. The stand planning this summer has been a challenge and the US pre clearance brings it's own problems, especially when delays happen. Next summer will be interesting with some of the airlines talking about more expansion.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 327 ✭✭Bebop


    QUOTE=The cries of "put him in charge of the HSE he'll sort it out", yes the HSE where you would pay for oxygen and have to put in 50c to charge the paddles before they use them on you

    We are getting into some serious topic creep here; maybe MOL can be persuaded to end his silence and give us something to talk about rather than endlessly recycling this kind of stuff


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,754 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    There is a bit of room there for expansion in the check in building, the foundations are in place already, you just can't see them. The baggage handling collector belt was also built with expansion in mind and can be added onto easily and the back end can handle the capacity of the extra check in desks. There is also the land and plans for extra stands, a new pier. Now, how long it would take to build these and what would trigger the build is another thing, and the minor detail of paying for them. The stand planning this summer has been a challenge and the US pre clearance brings it's own problems, especially when delays happen. Next summer will be interesting with some of the airlines talking about more expansion.

    They actually plan to expand the whole lot of the building, not just the check in hall to allow F be build with 12 narrow body stands. Would solve EI problem overnight if it was built.

    daa expect the check in hall trigger likely to be in 2019 regulation submission however it wouldn't surprise me if F pier is to because it will be 2024 before the next period.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 600 ✭✭✭Dublinflyer


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    They actually plan to expand the whole lot of the building, not just the check in hall to allow F be build with 12 narrow body stands. Would solve EI problem overnight if it was built.

    Sorry, that's what I meant :eek:

    If things keep going the way they are it will make for an interesting few years.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,853 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    Is the lack of a longer runway, currently impacting on business at dublin airport?


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Idbatterim wrote: »
    Is the lack of a longer runway, currently impacting on business at dublin airport?

    Possibly to probably, it'll be more the runway length that's impacting business.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 6,522 Mod ✭✭✭✭Irish Steve


    If DAA wasn't under the political banner, and had people that understand aviation, rather than political appointees who are there as a quid pro quo for some other reason, there might be a chance that DAA would run the place, rather than SIPTU, and we all know what SIPTU's agenda is, and improving the quality of the product offered at Dublin Airport doesn't figure very high on that agenda. Some of the design decisions that have been made over time beggar description, I used to work airside, and there are so many issues that cause huge problems it's not funny. As an example, one of the outbound baggage halls had to have been designed by an architect that had never been near the working areas of a busy airport in his life, the twists and turns that are required to get equipment in and out of the place defy description, and there's no storage space close to the baggage hall, so things like containers that are needed for outbound flights have to be parked a long way from the hall, causing delays and problems with managing the flow of bags through the hall. The slope into the 6 bay arrivals baggage hall is an accident black spot in the winter months, there have been a number of accidents due to ice on the inbound slope, and there are limits on the number of bags that can be taken in at one time as a result, which causes more problems for fast delivery of bags to the passengers.

    Even if DAA were really running the place, the chances of anything sensible happening any time soon is slim, regardless of how necessary it might be, or how much benefit it would bring to the national economy, the people at the top are about to go into "must get re-elected" mode, so anything that is even mildly controversial, or expensive, will get kicked into the long grass real soon, as we've already seen with the Howlin public pay pronouncement. Any serious expenditure is being mothballed, so even if it was self financing, expansion at Dublin is likely to be such a hot potato, or banana skin, (depending on your viewpoint), the politicians are going to run a mile from anything to do with Dublin Airport until after the next election.

    Realistically, the airport needs a number of things in order to keep operating sensibly. 28R is going to be needed before too long, and if it's not needed to provide extra capacity or longer routes, it's going to be needed in order to allow repair work on the existing 28.

    Cargo apron space is going to become an issue before too much longer, it's been neglected big time.

    Wide body gates are an issue, and the problem is that wide body aircraft can't be turned round in 25 minutes, for all sorts of reasons, like fuel loading times, so the throughput on the wide body gates is a lot lower than on a narrow body gate.

    The airport desperately needs a viable rail link into the city.

    The Departures road at T1 needs to be completely reorganised to segregate passengers from the car park from the traffic on the set down road, and to make it safer for passengers exiting from vehicles, the through lane should go down the middle lane of the 3, with the set down being on either side, avoiding the hassle of trying to get through a line of parked taxis blocking the middle lane and making kerbside access almost impossible.

    Another option would be to have a drop off and collect bay at one or both of the long term car parks, where people could be dropped or collected and then use the shuttle bus service to and from the terminals.

    The roundabout at the entrance needs to be replaced by a graded junction, so that the traffic flow is smoother, while there is still time to make those sorts of changes, rather than after the junction reaches grid lock levels, which it will when traffic levels recover as the eventual improvement in the economy happens.

    Shore, if it was easy, everybody would be doin it.😁



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,194 ✭✭✭man98


    25,000,000? Probably they weren't inspect the Travel Tax to be removed, increasing passenger numbers! And if the government are even thinking about spending the €2bn quoted on Page 1, why did they only dish out €150k on WAT's runway extension? I'd say lengthening ORK's runway to 9,000 feet or so to offload flights would be money better spent. Although they did build a €1bn to cope with increasing demand.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,780 ✭✭✭jamo2oo9


    man98 wrote: »
    25,000,000? Probably they weren't inspect the Travel Tax to be removed, increasing passenger numbers! And if the government are even thinking about spending the €2bn quoted on Page 1, why did they only dish out €150k on WAT's runway extension? I'd say lengthening ORK's runway to 9,000 feet or so to offload flights would be money better spent. Although they did build a €1bn to cope with increasing demand.

    The problem is, tourists don't fly to Cork as much as Dublin. Dublin is the aviation hub in Ireland for tourists. Extending the runway in Cork wouldn't do Dublin any favours in terms of easing congestion.


  • Registered Users Posts: 45 johnnycage2008


    does anyone know if they extend the existing main runway, will they extend it towards the East (e.g. coast) or towards the West (e.g.

    Also, is it a sure thing that the Northern runway will go ahead ?
    will this effect Malahide you think also ?

    Thanks a million ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,867 ✭✭✭sparrowcar


    does anyone know if they extend the existing main runway, will they extend it towards the East (e.g. coast) or towards the West (e.g.

    Also, is it a sure thing that the Northern runway will go ahead ?
    will this effect Malahide you think also ?

    Thanks a million ;)

    West
    Yes, eventually.
    No major affect to Malahide, other than approach over southern part of Malahide.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement