[MarkBrooks]

I find a number of folks refusal to acknowledge Hamilton’s location as a limit fascinating. I would suggest that this links directly back to the idea of a catchment area based on flight types/ lengths.

Since Canada is not a command control economy, passenger access becomes a personal choice influenced by time, money, convenience. For example, Someone living in Woodbine and 16th ave wishing to go to Sudbury, Northbay, Montreal, will get there just as fast by driving directly there ( 4 hours to Sudbury, 5 hours to Montreal ) vs taking a flight out of Hamilton.

This is because of the two hour drive to Hamilton airport, plus the need to arrive an hour early, ( time going thru customs waiting , boarding), Flying for an hour then deplaning and getting a cab to the final destination. Is the same time as driving direct.

This makes Hamilton unsuitable for many regional routes ( anything within 500 km).

Take a hour and a half off of the drive ( as Pickering Airport would do) and these regional routes become more attractive to travelers.

Just a reminder, take a jet anywhere is more fuel efficient, and produces less emissions that a single guy driving an average car. For short haul routes a Q400 does 3-3.5 liters per 100 km per passenger seat, and goes in a straight line asphalt free. ( a CSeries Jet is even more efficient)

 

[micheal_can]

Hamilton as 3 key limits, no rail, no jet A pipeline, and a location on the other side of Hamilton and the escarpment. These have been discussed before on this forum and could be partly fixed by Political will power and a billion dollar investment.

Even with these limits, Hamilton can provide capacity for the western part of Toronto once the big squeeze takes hold at Pearson but unless things change politically fuel and location limits are not going away and will always make second fiddle to Pickering..

One of the reasons why I am using the term “ The wall” is that each airport has different limitations. At city center the 6 - 8 fuel trucks loads a day being ferried over, plus the short regional routes and the Q400s ability to tanker fuel are enough to remove fuel as an limiting factor. its limits are runway length / capacity and the daily noise abatement limits.

Hamilton’s fuel must be trucked in. Unlike Pearson and Pickering it does not have access to rail or a pipeline. Pearson burns 100+ truck loads of fuel a day but luckily it has a pipeline for jet A coming in directly from the westover terminal. Extending a pipeline to Hamilton could be done if the political will could be found but it would be a tough fight, including expropriation of homes and businesses and the acceptance of a new pipeline right of way by local residents.

The same pipeline that feeds Pearson goes right past Pickering today. Pearson also uses rail to feed a secondary fuel farm. Pickering will do the same.

Pickering has no runways. I am pretty sure that is a BIG thing that is needed for an airport to be successful.

Pipeline and rail infrastructure isn't that hard to do, even in hilly Hamilton.

I find a number of folks refusal to acknowledge Hamilton’s location as a limit fascinating. I would suggest that this links directly back to the idea of a catchment area based on flight types/ lengths.

Since Canada is not a command control economy, passenger access becomes a personal choice influenced by time, money, convenience. For example, Someone living in Woodbine and 16th ave wishing to go to Sudbury, Northbay, Montreal, will get there just as fast by driving directly there ( 4 hours to Sudbury, 5 hours to Montreal ) vs taking a flight out of Hamilton.

This is because of the two hour drive to Hamilton airport, plus the need to arrive an hour early, ( time going thru customs waiting , boarding), Flying for an hour then deplaning and getting a cab to the final destination. Is the same time as driving direct.

This makes Hamilton unsuitable for many regional routes ( anything within 500 km).

Take a hour and a half off of the drive ( as Pickering Airport would do) and these regional routes become more attractive to travelers.

Just a reminder, take a jet anywhere is more fuel efficient, and produces less emissions that a single guy driving an average car. For short haul routes a Q400 does 3-3.5 liters per 100 km per passenger seat, and goes in a straight line asphalt free. ( a CSeries Jet is even more efficient)

Think of it in reverse. Many of us living 4 hours away would rather save the ~$500 plane ticket and just drive. So, adding another hour to our trip is ok. In fact, when people like me are looking, we already include Hamilton, Ottawa and Montreal into our search area. (Montreal is a 7 hour drive.)

This means those long hauls could use Hamilton and be well used even without no regional routes.

Remember, Pearson does not just serve Toronto, or even the GTA. It serves all of Ontario.

So, when you think about it, Pickering will not service all of Ontario as it has no draw, and would be located near a toll highway.

 

[kEiThZ]

Someone living in Woodbine and 16th ave wishing to go to Sudbury, Northbay, Montreal, will get there just as fast by driving directly there ( 4 hours to Sudbury, 5 hours to Montreal ) vs taking a flight out of Hamilton.

This is because of the two hour drive to Hamilton airport, plus the need to arrive an hour early, ( time going thru customs waiting , boarding), Flying for an hour then deplaning and getting a cab to the final destination. Is the same time as driving direct.

Someone living at Woodbine and 16th could take HFR from Markham or Scarborough for less than half the price of their airfare, to Montreal.

And they still have Pearson and Billy Bishop as airports for destinations like Sudbury. It's amazing how this guy wants to talk about catchments but ignores the two major airports that already serve Toronto. He also never addresses why someone from Milton would want to take a flight out of Pickering. Only ever talks about how Hamilton is inconvenient for Easterners. Yet, the large catchment is out west.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Those airlines that you mentioned would be welcome but are not expected to be the airports main users. It is 10 years out ( yes it will take that long to build) so any airline scenario is very speculative, beyond any business cases an airline would have in place. Even if they are planning that far ahead, none of them ever reveal core business plans.

But I can speculate ( totally unrelated to these airlines )

My informed speculation on the first tenants of the airport is this:.

The main users will come from the fallout of Toronto’s big squeeze. First to hit the wall will be city center ( 2024) then Pearson ( 2027-2030) runs out of all weather slots. The capacity of both Pickering to the east and Hamilton to the west needs to be ready for these users.

No need to speculate. The recent reopening of the IFT shows airlines that are at the bottom of the barrel in Pearsons' plans (Icelandair, Ukraine International, Aer Lingus, Condor, Azores Airlines & Primera Air). These are airlines that run minimal flights to Toronto, and don't have many connections to other airlines at the airport, (Icelandair for example only recently increased to a daily flight schedule). Can Pickering survive on handful to a dozon international airlines and the hopes of securing a domestic carrier?

I am sure you can name the island users, but Pearson squeeze will pop some interesting point to point players over to Pickering. The discount point to point airlines not owned by air Canada or westjet is a longer list than you might think.

For obvious reasons will not call them out by name but finding an anchor tenant in each of the categories is not an issue.

If you are not connected to Pickering airport what other reason do you have to not name airlines? This whole site is built on speculation.

 

[kEiThZ]

Can Pickering survive on handful to a dozon international airlines and the hopes of securing a domestic carrier?

If not overbuilt? Absolutely. But this doesn't need an airport that costs several billion dollars. They could probably hit more than Billy Bishop's 3 million pax annually with substantially less than a billion.

But which of those airlines would want to move? Aer Lingus, for example, is part of IAG (also the parent of British Airways and Iberian) and codeshares with WestJet. Why would they move?

If you are not connected to Pickering airport what other reason do you have to not name airlines?

To build up suspense and intrigue. The Trumpian tactic of, "People are saying....". Mark's probably friends with a few local politicians and business folks pushing the idea.But airlines are not going to commit to some random with a website.

 

[MarkBrooks]

No need to speculate. The recent reopening of the IFT shows airlines that are at the bottom of the barrel in Pearsons' plans (Icelandair, Ukraine International, Aer Lingus, Condor, Azores Airlines & Primera Air). These are airlines that run minimal flights to Toronto, and don't have many connections to other airlines at the airport, (Icelandair for example only recently increased to a daily flight schedule). Can Pickering survive on handful to a dozon international airlines and the hopes of securing a domestic carrier?



If you are not connected to Pickering airport what other reason do you have to not name airlines? This whole site is built on speculation.

Alway nice to come home after a carefully planned day of flying folks to find a carefree discussion on my favorite topic. Or was that supposed to be a trap laying await?
Never mind. . So if I promote Porter airlines, I am a corporate shrill and by carefully being neutral and not naming anyone I have something to hide. A strange time we live in.

It seems that this digital ecosystem has fostered and promoted anxiety and suspicion more than friendly conversation. Let’s get back to the ideas on which this platform was founded.

Since you are speculating, try a real name that would make an air Canada investor wake up with a cold shiver, Southwest.

But I am sure that Air Canada will have the common sense to stop opposing Pickering and get on board before it comes to that.

Sleep tight.

 

[dowlingm]

Norwegian cutbacks hit Hamilton https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hami...tlantic-flights-hamilton-boeing-max-1.5245495

 

[kEiThZ]

Southwest has been talking about coming to Canada for over decade. And every time they think about it, they up their service to Buffalo. There are no fees to cross the border by land. But plenty if you cross by air. So they can bank on Canadians using border airports for a while.

Here they are saying they could expand to Canada a year ago:

Southwest eyes Canada for next round of expansion

ANNAPOLIS — Southwest’s expansion plans could include Canada.

www.travelweek.ca

Here they are saying the same thing in 2014:

Southwest Airlines targets Canadian expansion

‘I’d be surprised if we weren’t in Canada at least by the end of the decade,’ chief executive officer Gary Kelly said

www.theglobeandmail.com

They could start service to Hamilton anytime. They could have started service to Pearson years ago. Ultimately, they will always reach the same conclusion. Airport fees are high in Canada. And their brand recognition isn’t strong enough north of the border. Southwest does not support aggregators. You can’t book a Southwest fare on Expedia. You have to use Southwest’s website. And that requires a loyal base who know to always book on southwest.com.

The fees for a brand new airport, even if the terminal was a bus shelter, will never bring Southwest to Canada. And flying to Canada, a new country, would be a massive undertaking for Southwest. Why they would incur all that cost to operate to a higher cost airport when those same aircraft can generate so much more profit on another route in the US, is beyond me. But maybe Mark knows something the rest of us don’t.

 

[Kyle Campbell]

Alway nice to come home after a carefully planned day of flying folks to find a carefree discussion on my favorite topic. Or was that supposed to be a trap laying await?
Never mind. . So if I promote Porter airlines, I am a corporate shrill and by carefully being neutral and not naming anyone I have something to hide. A strange time we live in.

It seems that this digital ecosystem has fostered and promoted anxiety and suspicion more than friendly conversation. Let’s get back to the ideas on which this platform was founded.

Since you are speculating, try a real name that would make an air Canada investor wake up with a cold shiver, Southwest.

But I am sure that Air Canada will have the common sense to stop opposing Pickering and get on board before it comes to that.

Sleep tight.

I don't think you understand the objection. It's perfectly sensible to build an airport at Pickering serving general aviation, maybe some commercial traffic with a small terminal and even have plans that it could "grow up" to be a peer with Pearson over the decades if demand warranted it.

It's totally nonsensical to build an airport that would be vastly larger then major airports in Ottawa, Winnipeg and Edmonton, all of which have between 1 and 5 million people within a 2 hour drive and don't have to compete with three other major airports (Pearson, Billy Bishop, Hamilton) in the same metro area, one of which is the largest hub in Canada.

Not to mention the very nearby Buffalo and it's cheaper access into American destinations

 

[MarkBrooks]

I don't think you understand the objection. It's perfectly sensible to build an airport at Pickering serving general aviation, maybe some commercial traffic with a small terminal and even have plans that it could "grow up" to be a peer with Pearson over the decades if demand warranted it.

It's totally nonsensical to build an airport that would be vastly larger then major airports in Ottawa, Winnipeg and Edmonton, all of which have between 1 and 5 million people within a 2 hour drive and don't have to compete with three other major airports (Pearson, Billy Bishop, Hamilton) in the same metro area, one of which is the largest hub in Canada.

I politely disagree. You might want to check you numbers on Edmonton (1.3 million people) and Winnipeg ( 1 million pax catchment areas , about a 1/3 the size of Pickerings.) as for Ottawa , We have Carp, Gatineau ,nearby and Montreal Trudeau only two hours drive away, yet it still does a booming business on 5 million travelers a year on a million residents.

The last private design I saw for Pickering was smaller that Ottawa but it is most certainly not a GA airport. Its first phase is designed to handle up 12 million passengers a year.

Note:
I wish we could just get going by building a smaller GA airport and then letting it grow.

The original private not for profit Pickering Airpark proposal was just that. A replacement for Buttonville that over time could grow into something else.
I had a non paying role in that proposal and It’s how I learned of the deeper big money opposition to Pickering, pumping Hamilton, Pearson. In hindsight we should have expected this sort of opposition, given the nature of the Toronto region growth driven politics. Every region, and every business is fighting to steer growth and business its way and no one wants competition from Durham region.

The Airpark Proposal was turned down by transport. We where never given a reason. Although we now know that, both the 2010 capacity study and now the 2018 KPMG capacity study clearly calls for a larger regional airport with a passenger focus.

The numbers say that Pickering will be Canada’s 5 th larger passenger airport within a few years of opening.

Ultimately why shouldn’t Durham region have its own airport? This debate would be over in a flash if we just let the region lease the land. There would be an airport built so fast heads would spin.

 

[narduch]

Ultimately why shouldn’t Durham region have its own airport? This debate would be over in a flash if we just let the region lease the land. There would be an airport built so fast heads would spin.

I'm willing to bet that if a referendum were held in Durham Region people would resoundingly vote against an airport.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Alway nice to come home after a carefully planned day of flying folks to find a carefree discussion on my favorite topic. Or was that supposed to be a trap laying await?

Pointless and unnecessary, adds nothing to the discussion other than an attempt at bragging. I was was at the blue jays game last night, does anyone care? But then I'm the troll

Never mind. . So if I promote Porter airlines, I am a corporate shrill and by carefully being neutral and not naming anyone I have something to hide. A strange time we live in.

It seems that this digital ecosystem has fostered and promoted anxiety and suspicion more than friendly conversation. Let’s get back to the ideas on which this platform was founded.

Since you are speculating, try a real name that would make an air Canada investor wake up with a cold shiver, Southwest.

But I am sure that Air Canada will have the common sense to stop opposing Pickering and get on board before it comes to that.

Sleep tight.

Mark I'm not going to go back through multiple years of posts but I am certain at some point here in this forum you admitted to being part of a pro Pickering lobby group, in fact you did it yesterday as well:

The original private not for profit Pickering Airpark proposal was just that. A replacement for Buttonville that over time could grow into something else. I had a non paying role in that proposal and It’s how I learned of the deeper big money opposition to Pickering, pumping Hamilton, Pearson. In hindsight we should have expected this sort of opposition, given the nature of the Toronto region growth driven politics. Every region, and every business is fighting to steer growth and business its way and no one wants competition from Durham region.

Also you are the author of the website pickeringairport.org whose articles you link to on this site regularly. So either you have a vested interest in Pickering happening or you don't which is it?

So by making comments like:

For obvious reasons will not call them out by name but finding an anchor tenant in each of the categories is not an issue.

you sound like you are even more involved in the Pickering proposal and perhaps have airlines who have expressed interest but do not want to be named just yet. Do you think that is too far a leap of logic Mark? Because I don't

 

[lenaitch]

We have Carp, Gatineau ,nearby and Montreal Trudeau only two hours drive away, yet it still does a booming business on 5 million travelers a year on a million residents.

Of course, not being a pilot, I was unaware that Carp and Gatineau had airfields. Are they part of the commercial traffic mix for Ottawa? I'm not sure the 'passenger-to-population' ratio for Ottawa is a fair comparator in relation to other cities, being that Ottawa is the centre of the Canadian government/bureaucratic universe.

Ultimately why shouldn’t Durham region have its own airport? This debate would be over in a flash if we just let the region lease the land. There would be an airport built so fast heads would spin.

This sort of sounds like the Scarborough subway vs. LRT argument. They should get on because they 'deserve' one? If the residents are so hard on about having their own airport, they can build one (including the supporting infrastructure) from their taxbase or own debt.

 

[micheal_can]

Guys, guys, guys.... Mark wants Toronto to have it's very own, but much more costlier Mirabel. Pickering will end up being a cargo/GA airport. However, it will have been so overbuilt that it will make anything we have done prior look like a well thought out thing.

He can't/wont name airlines that would switch over/start from there.
He expects the government to pay for it.
He shrinks the catchment to a point that he can argue against Hamilton.
He ignores the fact that most people will just use Pearson.

Facts are facts, and those, are the facts.

 

[MarkBrooks]

Of course, not being a pilot, I was unaware that Carp and Gatineau had airfields. Are they part of the commercial traffic mix for Ottawa? I'm not sure the 'passenger-to-population' ratio for Ottawa is a fair comparator in relation to other cities, being that Ottawa is the centre of the Canadian government/bureaucratic universe.


This sort of sounds like the Scarborough subway vs. LRT argument. They should get on because they 'deserve' one? If the residents are so hard on about having their own airport, they can build one (including the supporting infrastructure) from their taxbase or own debt.

Thankyou , yes Durham would love to push aside the competition from others regions and kick off an airport initiative itself. Why wouldn’t it. Private funding, thousands of jobs, the fulfillment of the proairport campaign promises made by the politicians elected in last falls civic elections. This issue would be a done deal if this was a local Durham issue instead of the Feds wanting to drive the bus. After all, why should objections from Hamilton, two hours to the west, stall the development of Durham ?