Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

JCX BXC

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So Aer Lingus know they will arrive 30 mins early 3-4+ hours in advance. Everything at that point looks rosy, the stand plan is working. The previous occupant of the stand is due out 25 mins before the inbound arrives. But just before it pushes it develops a snag, a passenger faints, the load sheets are wrong, it picks up a late slot due to weather at its destination, the tug breaks down etc etc etc.

The way you're painting the picture is that it's only a rare occurrence.

I reject what you're saying completely, the stand issues for inbound transatlantic flights is utterly shocking. It's certainly not exclusive to Dublin, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable.

However, I don't expect this to change anytime soon, many thanks to CAR for their contribution ensuring this. I sympathise with the DAA as they won't be able to invest in infrastructure thanks to the strangling by CAR, but will get all of the heat from these delays.

Noxegon

Deleted User wrote: »

So Aer Lingus know they will arrive 30 mins early 3-4+ hours in advance. Everything at that point looks rosy, the stand plan is working. The previous occupant of the stand is due out 25 mins before the inbound arrives. But just before it pushes it develops a snag, a passenger faints, the load sheets are wrong, it picks up a late slot due to weather at its destination, the tug breaks down etc etc etc.

This is why you plan for contingencies.

Noxegon

Noxegon wrote: »

This is why you plan for contingencies.

This is why they have contingency’s. In this case “do you want a remote stand ?” “No the delay is only 25 mins we will stick with the current stand thanks”. It is very likely that the airline knows exactly what the delay is with the outbound anyway as it likely was one of their own aircraft late off stand anyway.

It is likely the stand was available 15 mins after the aircraft was meant to land, but, it likely took 10-15 mins for the aircraft to push and clear the stand and the inbound to taxi in and on to the stand when they could.

Again arriving early is the airlines fault, nice for the passenger if there is a stand available, but a pain for the airport during a busy arrival/departure time.

This is like Groundhog Day in here having to do this again. Let’s be reasonable guys rapid expansion is hard to keep up with. Expecting the airport to supply two/three spare stands per pier and have them available ALL the time is unreasonable sorry. People need to reel in their expectations.

trellheim

Deleted User wrote: »

So Aer Lingus know they will arrive 30 mins early 3-4+ hours in advance. Everything at that point looks rosy, the stand plan is working. The previous occupant of the stand is due out 25 mins before the inbound arrives. But just before it pushes it develops a snag, a passenger faints, the load sheets are wrong, it picks up a late slot due to weather at its destination, the tug breaks down etc etc etc.

These are the day to day issues that happen constantly at a major international airport. It never ceases to amaze me how people always think and believe that for every eventuality or situation there should be a spare stand, bus, tug, etc just sitting waiting. It never ceases to amaze me how people who are international travellers always think that this JUST happens in Dublin. The LAX, SFO and SEA flights arrive at peak heavy departure movements time.

Imagine rocking up to a busy popular restaurant at peak time on a busy day 30-40 mins before your reservation and telling them you want your table or to make another available right now, reasonable ?

People must think we really are self-loading cargo . Some of us are through all the time and remember theres the airport we depart from and arrive into as well, mostly bigger hubs than Dublin, where this rarely happens if at all on longhaul or shorthaul. Some of us also work happen to work in busy roles where flexibility and improvisation within the scope of very demanding rules and regulations ( and customers ) are the mark of competence ; we are well aware its busy and crowded but we didnt land out of a clear blue sky either.


With your restauraunt analogy if you want the chef's table, sure, that analogy holds but in this context theres 10 tables free and an empty balcony that you knew would be empty three hours in advance so put some napkins and place settings down , the maitre'd's just rang in with a large party coming in 2 hours time

To hit my specifics - why not use a 300 gate for the a330 and put that shorthaul 320 on the remote gates south of T2 - thats what they are for as far as I know unpleasant though they are

MJohnston

EI146 went to a 300 gate this morning, I can confirm, having stepped off of it!

EchoIndia

MJohnston wrote: »

EI146 went to a 300 gate this morning, I can confirm, having stepped off of it!

That's a very common occurrence for the later Atlantic arrivals.

MJohnston

EchoIndia wrote: »

That's a very common occurrence for the later Atlantic arrivals.

I know, it’s happened to me a few times on that flight, just wanted to mention it in reference to the last few posts.

shanec1928

we had a delay of 30 mins waiting for a stand in t2 due to a delta plane not having ice a few weeks back.

Locker10a

shanec1928 wrote: »

we had a delay of 30 mins waiting for a stand in t2 due to a delta plane not having ice a few weeks back.

I hope the catering company are severely fined fir causing such a delay

sparrowcar

Locker10a wrote: »

I hope the catering company are severely fined fir causing such a delay

And the company who makes the ice making machine should be in front of the Oireachtas.

They won't be severely fined because it's probably not the entire truth behind the delay just what the other flights passengers were told. Even it if was they have an SLA and 1 lack of ice delay won't cause a fine. Just daily life in a large international airport.

Locker10a

sparrowcar wrote: »

And the company who makes the ice making machine should be in front of the Oireachtas.

They won't be severely fined because it's probably not the entire truth behind the delay just what the other flights passengers were told. Even it if was they have an SLA and 1 lack of ice delay won't cause a fine. Just daily life in a large international airport.

Delay fines can be imposed and should be in my opinion, especially in a congested airport like Dublin where there’s a genuine operational impact to holding up a gate/stand. There needs to be an incentive on all parties to smarten up their act and run things properly

sparrowcar

Locker10a wrote: »

Delay fines can be imposed and should be in my opinion, especially in a congested airport like Dublin where there’s a genuine operational impact to holding up a gate/stand. There needs to be an incentive on all parties to smarten up their act and run things properly

Completely agree but throwing out a serious fine comment for the caterer without the full picture doesn't help in this discussion.

IMO the airline should have been forced to push and tow to a remote stand while waiting for ice if that's the full story.

trellheim

Might have been a deice queue or is it that time of year yet ? Do the longhauls use A-CDM - prob not but dont know the answer

Kermit.de.frog

I was wondering can someone answer a question?

The new runway will be 3,110 m in length.

Yet some seem to say it can't handle flights from the far east for example.

Yet Manchester's longest runway is shorter at 3,050 m. They seem to have no issue?

What's the deal here because there is conflicting views.

Noxegon

At a guess, the additional distance between Manchester and Dublin when heading to somewhere like Singapore requires more than another sixty metres of runway?

goingnowhere

Current runway is a problem, no question of that. Still have flights to Hong Kong all the same

The 3110m will be longer than Manchester, Stansted, Birmingham, Berlin TXL, Dusseldorf

Brian CivilEng

As I recall, longer runway only needed for older aircraft such as B747-400. Modern aircraft such as A350 and B787 can take off at max take-off weight (MTOW) from 3110m.

IngazZagni

Length of the runway is only 1 factor for takeoff performance. Obstacle clearance is often something that is more limiting than runway length. That means that aircraft need to be able to clear high obstacles such as masts or hills by a large margin. Lanzarote is obstacle limited for example. I also hear this can limit the neos at Dublin currently.

I believe the new runway will be more than capable of handling the longest routes and it’s just speculation that it won’t but I’m just assuming too

blackwhite

IngazZagni wrote: »

Length of the runway is only 1 factor for takeoff performance. Obstacle clearance is often something that is more limiting than runway length. That means that aircraft need to be able to clear high obstacles such as masts or hills by a large margin. Lanzarote is obstacle limited for example. I also hear this can limit the neos at Dublin currently.

I believe the new runway will be more than capable of handling the longest routes and it’s just speculation that it won’t but I’m just assuming too

What "obstacles" are there lined up with 10/28 that could cause clearance issues?

It's higher than the surrounding lands at either end, and there's no tall buildings or masts either?

Stealthirl

blackwhite wrote: »

What "obstacles" are there lined up with 10/28 that could cause clearance issues?

It's higher than the surrounding lands at either end, and there's no tall buildings or masts either?

Noise abatement would be my main guess. Aircraft have to be at a given altitude over some areas

basill

Stealthirl wrote: »

Noise abatement would be my main guess. Aircraft have to be at a given altitude over some areas

Its nice to be a good neighbour and comply with the noise abatement rules/height restrictions but safety and operational reasons will override these. If an aircraft is to heavy to make a restriction for noise then you will fess up to ATC and they will duly acknowledge. Its up to the airport authority to then fine the airline or send them a naughty boy/girl letter. Also when there are thunderstorms in the departure area we will turn to avoid and disregard the SID/noise restrictions. Happens all the time, its called good airmanship.

DublinKev

Could anyone tell me what the huge hole that was dug, to the north of the new runway, close to the Naul Rd roundabout is? Some serious foundations being poured in there over the last few weeks.

sparrowcar

DublinKev wrote: »

Could anyone tell me what the huge hole that was dug, to the north of the new runway, close to the Naul Rd roundabout is? Some serious foundations being poured in there over the last few weeks.

Approach lighting mounds or DME?

Brian CivilEng

DublinKev wrote: »

Could anyone tell me what the huge hole that was dug, to the north of the new runway, close to the Naul Rd roundabout is? Some serious foundations being poured in there over the last few weeks.

Attenuation tanks for drainage.

HTCOne

Locker10a wrote: »

Delay fines can be imposed and should be in my opinion, especially in a congested airport like Dublin where there’s a genuine operational impact to holding up a gate/stand. There needs to be an incentive on all parties to smarten up their act and run things properly

I was told a couple of years ago the DAA do fine for blocking a gate beyond allocated time. €200 per minute IIRC.

denis halpenny

Just on the point of the passenger charges being reduced by CAR. Why could they not leave well enough alone and leave the charges as they were, as the DAA pointed out Dublin airport was still cheaper than a lot of European airports.Who in their right minds in CAR suggested this change? Now there will be major hold ups in major construction projects that need to be done and if they are not done in the near future, the airport and the economy as a whole will suffer.

Tenger

Im guessing the CAR figured that the DAA will be able to get financing for their capital investment pretty easily rather than funding from customers. Its a fast growing profitable airport a pretty safe bet to loan to.

IE 222

Tenger wrote: »

Im guessing the CAR figured that the DAA will be able to get financing for their capital investment pretty easily rather than funding from customers. Its a fast growing profitable airport a pretty safe bet to loan to.

Maybe at the moment it is but what about in 5-10 years time when its in debt of €100s of million or a billion after having to finance new runways, taxi ways, stands and possibly a terminal and everything else that goes along with it. There is only so much finance someone will give you. It's also not a very good idea in the long term to riddle the company with debts.

Your right that it's a safe bet as if it does go tits up over the coming years for whatever reason the state will end up paying off the debt or the financial institution will gain a major national asset either way.

DublinKev

abitofacomedian wrote: »

Attenuation tanks for drainage.

Thanks. That’s a lot of drainage. Although there are at least two rivers that go across the land that Runway North is going across. Culverts to be built I assume.

Kermit.de.frog

Also should be pointed out DAA want to spend 2 billion just to bring the airport to 40 million passengers.

Seems very expensive just for that.

More logical would be to put the money toward a much larger new terminal that could take numbers to 60 million if and when required.

2 billion to accommodate just 5 million extra passenger doesn't seem right. All of T2 was cheaper!