News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 6.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 33K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 3.3K     0 

drum118

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
18,580
Reaction score
17,565
City:
Toronto
It takes me 2 hr driving from my place to Downtown Buffalo. It takes me 20 minutes to get to the airport + 2 hrs check in + X minutes flight time + luggage pickup + 20 minutes to Downtown Buffalo. This is assuming one is going Downtown Buffalo which is not my case in the first place.

Our last trip on WestJet too over an haft an hours to get our baggage and my carry on bag was torn. It took over 3 weeks to get it replace. Great mistake taking up that free offer to put it in the hold as the replacement was very cheap and will not last long as my other one.

When looking at the cost for both options, far cheaper to drive even though traffic can be a bitch at time as well clearing custom at the boarder.

The last time we flew to the US, we weren't sure we would make our flight even though we were there more than 2 hrs before our flight. Good thing I have Nexus card, as it cut our wait time in haft is not more. Never seen that large backup before.
 

Woodbridge_Heights

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
3,117
Reaction score
1,044
Read a FB post that Sunwing will be moving from T3 to the Infield terminal. The group has some pretty reliable insiders so I'm going assume this is true.

This is a pretty significant move IMO, it is one thing to move a handful of non alliance international airlines with 1 or 2 flights a day to Toronto and a totally different thing to move a domestic airline with dozens of daily flights out of Toronto.

At this point I think expanding capacity at Pearson should be a priority.
 

Streety McCarface

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
2,124
Reaction score
2,222
Read a FB post that Sunwing will be moving from T3 to the Infield terminal. The group has some pretty reliable insiders so I'm going assume this is true.

This is a pretty significant move IMO, it is one thing to move a handful of non alliance international airlines with 1 or 2 flights a day to Toronto and a totally different thing to move a domestic airline with dozens of daily flights out of Toronto.

At this point I think expanding capacity at Pearson should be a priority.
The IFT is still Pearson, dedicating an entire terminal to the third largest airline at the airport actually seems like a pretty smart move. The priority now is T1 because International gates and US gates are most constrained, and AC/Star Alliance will pay significantly more for airport improvement fees (they have nowhere else to go and they're a legacy carrier that relies on business passengers). Westjet is kind of in the middle of the LCC and Legacy model, and they have a huge base at YYZ. Given how close they are to Delta, it makes sense that T3 is mainly dedicated to them.
 

Woodbridge_Heights

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
3,117
Reaction score
1,044
Really I don't see the benefit of treating the 3rd largest tenent like a third class citizen. I realize that this set up (a remote terminal with bussing from the main building) is common in the airport industry. However, here where we have, or had, a plan on the books for expansion of the facilities when demand requires it. Yet here we are, demand clearly pushing the capacity at the gates and the solution is to reopen the IFT which has always been intended for temporary use.

You know I didn't have an issue with moving the handful of international airlines out there because well, they are not important to Pearson's operations. Moving Sunwing to the IFT, however, is going to affect a significant number of its patrons and I predict the complaints will soon come fast and furious.
 

gweed123

Moderator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
7,834
Reaction score
1,580
City:
Hamilton
Really I don't see the benefit of treating the 3rd largest tenent like a third class citizen. I realize that this set up (a remote terminal with bussing from the main building) is common in the airport industry. However, here where we have, or had, a plan on the books for expansion of the facilities when demand requires it. Yet here we are, demand clearly pushing the capacity at the gates and the solution is to reopen the IFT which has always been intended for temporary use.

You know I didn't have an issue with moving the handful of international airlines out there because well, they are not important to Pearson's operations. Moving Sunwing to the IFT, however, is going to affect a significant number of its patrons and I predict the complaints will soon come fast and furious.

I wonder if Sunwing is getting a discount from the airport for moving over there, allowing them to lower their prices more? When you're in the budget vacation business, every dollar counts.
 

TransitBart

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 26, 2016
Messages
2,378
Reaction score
1,719
City:
Toronto
Why are Air Canada’s departures to the USA from new (well at this stage 15 year old - it opened in 2005) from a bloody Quonset Hut? I am at a complete loss to understand where Pier H went to. This is as bad an example of doing more with less as I have ever seen.
 

Woodbridge_Heights

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
3,117
Reaction score
1,044
Why are Air Canada’s departures to the USA from new (well at this stage 15 year old - it opened in 2005) from a bloody Quonset Hut? I am at a complete loss to understand where Pier H went to. This is as bad an example of doing more with less as I have ever seen.

Are you talking about the newly opened transborder gates? Because that was built as a comprimise of costs. Otherwise i cant think of any part of the airport that one could describe as a quisonant hut.

All USA bound flights depart from the same area (a combination of flex gates on pier F and the transborder gates at the southeast of the terminal) due to passengers pre clearing US customs and needing to be segregated from all other passengers.
 

Streety McCarface

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
2,124
Reaction score
2,222
Why are Air Canada’s departures to the USA from new (well at this stage 15 year old - it opened in 2005) from a bloody Quonset Hut? I am at a complete loss to understand where Pier H went to. This is as bad an example of doing more with less as I have ever seen.
From what I've heard, Pier H will still be constructed, and the majority of E-series, C-series, 737, and A319/A320 flights will be shifted over there, while Pier G will handle CRJ commuter flights (and some e-series flights), with the rest of Pier F covering A321, A330, some 737, 767, 777, and 787 flights throughout the US. (There are surprising a lot of widebody flights throughout the US during peak seasons. SFO and LAX each get 2 (either the A330, 787 or 777 depending on the season), Honolulu gets 1, and there are a bunch of rouge flights that fly with 767s (2 each to Tampa, Orlando, Phoenix, Miami, Las Vegas, one each to San Diego, and I believe Sarasota). With rouge getting some more 767s, I wouldn't be surprised if they want even more flights to sun destinations.
 

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
19,804
Reaction score
48,740
City:
Toronto
Bombardier building the world's "most advanced aircraft manufacturing" facility in Toronto

DH Toronto Staff | Dec 5 2019, 6:47 am

Bombardier has announced that it has signed a long-term lease with the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) to build its new “state-of-the art Global Manufacturing Centre” at Toronto Pearson International Airport.

The first production is set to start in 2023, and Bombardier said “the cutting-edge facility will optimize final assembly operations for all Global business jets, including the industry flagship Global 7500 business jet.”

 

kEiThZ

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
11,648
Reaction score
7,076
Bombardier building the world's "most advanced aircraft manufacturing" facility in Toronto

DH Toronto Staff | Dec 5 2019, 6:47 am

Bombardier has announced that it has signed a long-term lease with the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) to build its new “state-of-the art Global Manufacturing Centre” at Toronto Pearson International Airport.

The first production is set to start in 2023, and Bombardier said “the cutting-edge facility will optimize final assembly operations for all Global business jets, including the industry flagship Global 7500 business jet.”


I absolutely don't understand this. How the heck are they going to do testing at a busy airport like Pearson?
 

Irishmonk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
2,014
Reaction score
1,288
I absolutely don't understand this. How the heck are they going to do testing at a busy airport like Pearson?
Pearson has 5 runways which is a lot for an airport its size. By comparison Heathrow has just 2 despite being nearly twice as busy.
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
17,705
Reaction score
17,832
City:
Toronto
Pearson has 5 runways which is a lot for an airport its size. By comparison Heathrow has just 2 despite being nearly twice as busy.
It has 5, but only regularly uses 3 of them. The two north-south runways are used rarely when headwinds change to a non-typical direction. Probably 90% of flights are off of the main 3, and even then, most of them come off of the two main runways.

It's literally impossible for all 5 runways to be open at once, as they cross paths with each other.
 

lenaitch

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
4,457
Reaction score
4,553
I'm not sure it's just about the number of runways but the capacity of the airspace. Regular commercial movements entail entering and landing or taking off exiting the airspace. Flight testing, both ground and airborne, require movements that are going to be challenging.
 

rbt

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
7,194
Reaction score
3,380
Pearson has 5 runways which is a lot for an airport its size. By comparison Heathrow has just 2 despite being nearly twice as busy.

Heathrow is 25% busier. The number of aircraft movements (takeoffs and landings) is the primary restriction, the number of people on those flights doesn't matter all that much for busyness of the runway. Heathrow runs much larger aircraft on average, but the number of aircraft isn't all that much higher.

The ability to scale up aircraft size without impacting overall runway busyness is why several on this forum believe Pearson, Hamilton, Waterloo can grow traffic significantly without needing to build an entirely new airport for the GTA.


I'm not against a new airport, provided it pays land-rent fees and doesn't require government investment other than basic ground transportation.
 
Last edited:

Woodbridge_Heights

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
3,117
Reaction score
1,044
I'm not sure it's just about the number of runways but the capacity of the airspace. Regular commercial movements entail entering and landing or taking off exiting the airspace. Flight testing, both ground and airborne, require movements that are going to be challenging.

Though it does fly in the face of the idea that Pearson needs to offload some of its private air traffic to free up time/space for more commercial flights.
 

Top