TOareaFan
Superstar
incognito mode... no need to pay.
wife is old fashioned and likes to read the paper in its original form....so online access comes with subscription.
incognito mode... no need to pay.
I'm happy with Stintz changing her position in both cases. I don't consider it flip-flopping. Flip-flopping would be coming back and saying she's back to supporting LRT and no jets.
I'm happy with Stintz changing her position in both cases. I don't consider it flip-flopping. Flip-flopping would be coming back and saying she's back to supporting LRT and no jets.
I'm happy with Stintz changing her position in both cases. I don't consider it flip-flopping. Flip-flopping would be coming back and saying she's back to supporting LRT and no jets.
Stintz was always for a B-D extension, but she had to revive the previously approved 2010 plan (which included an LRT to replace the SRT) to garner enough votes so that the transit file could be taken away from Ford. Once that was accomplished, she almost immediately started lobbying for the subway along with Glen de Bearemaker.Right. So railing against LRTs in Scarborough, then endorsing LRTs in Scarborough, and then railing against LRTs in Scarborough is not flip-flopping. Sure.
Right. So railing against LRTs in Scarborough, then endorsing LRTs in Scarborough, and then railing against LRTs in Scarborough is not flip-flopping. Sure.
Reading through that posting...the biggest "difference" between the writer and the responder seems to be what the curfew covers. The writer included a bunch of flights that had wheels down at 10:58-11 but arrived at the terminal after 11.....the writer makes the point that "noise is noise" and it should not matter if it is noise taxing or landing....but, I bet, contractually there is a difference and the agreement probably defines a landing in relation to the wheels touching the runway.
It seems there is a fair amount of those planes that touchdown right at or near 11....that is probably no accident either.....I bet you Porter designs its daily schedule working back from that 11 pm curfew and attempts to maximize its fleet use knowing the last planes landing at YTZ have to be on the ground by 11. So when you eliminate that disagreement between what defines a landing (and, I doubt the TPA would be able to adopt a wheels down definition if the triparty agreement used an "at the terminal" definition) then you are left with the 2 flights that Porter was fined for and a bunch that while they did start off headed for YTZ and did land after 11....they were diverted to other airports (YYZ and YHM) so they are not issues (unless the suspicion is that TPA is lying about where they landed ).
I get that you are not making a big deal over this and it does not surprise me that those who are watching it very closely are likely erring on the side of the coin they favour. Looking at their own stats for December, though, it really does look like there were two flights outside the rules and Porter was fined for both of them.
flip flopping is a very modern political term and I am really not sure I understand it. People seem to dislike politicians who have opposing opinions to theirs and spend a lot of time espousing their own opinions in debates discussions. If a politicians exhibits any flexibility in their position they are labled wishy-washy and, god forbid, if they actually see the value/merit in the opinions of others and change their own stance they are accused of flip-flopping.
It's almost as if we really value the dogmatic two party, polar opposite, type of politics that has ground America's congress to a halt so often and anyone showing flexibility is ridiculed/dismissed.
Who is paying for this runway extension? Does any of the bill wind its way back to Porter?
Also, does Porter really expect that flying to destinations like Vancouver and LAX are worth going into substantial debt and fundamentally changing a tried and true business model? I mean, Porter does what it does well because it has a niche: business people and high end civil servants who work in downtown Toronto who need to fly to short haul, underserved or lucrative destinations: Sault Ste. Marie, New York, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City.
Once you cross the 3.5 hour flight threshold, the benefit of flying out of a downtown airport instead of Pearson starts to shrink. It will shrink even further once the UPX opens. It probably disappears completely when you realize that Pearson has border preclearance, and YTZ does not.
This is a bit anecdotal, but I fly YVR to Toronto fairly regularly, and I will not consider Porter in the future. They won't compete on price, and their emphasis on luxury only goes so far when you are crammed into a regional jet. I find regional jets to be claustrophobic beyond 2 hour flights, and I'm not even a particularly tall guy.
I agree with everything you say, and this is a big part of my reasoning against the Island Airport expansion. Porter does what it does well - and their competition with AC Jazz/Express is big reason why I was able to justify going Sault Ste. Marie early last month. (I've also flown to Timmins, Dulles, Ottawa, Midway, and Newark on Porter.)
Porter does offer a bit more legroom - but that's necessary due to the limited amount of weight the Q400s can handle flying into and out of YTZ. With the longer runway, will it even offer that now that it can increase the aircraft payload? Even with increased legroom, I find the Q400s cramped.
Who is paying for this runway extension? Does any of the bill wind its way back to Porter?
Also, does Porter really expect that flying to destinations like Vancouver and LAX are worth going into substantial debt and fundamentally changing a tried and true business model? I mean, Porter does what it does well because it has a niche: business people and high end civil servants who work in downtown Toronto who need to fly to short haul, underserved or lucrative destinations: Sault Ste. Marie, New York, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City.
Once you cross the 3.5 hour flight threshold, the benefit of flying out of a downtown airport instead of Pearson starts to shrink. It will shrink even further once the UPX opens. It probably disappears completely when you realize that Pearson has border preclearance, and YTZ does not.
This is a bit anecdotal, but I fly YVR to Toronto fairly regularly, and I will not consider Porter in the future. They won't compete on price, and their emphasis on luxury only goes so far when you are crammed into a regional jet. I find regional jets to be claustrophobic beyond 2 hour flights, and I'm not even a particularly tall guy.