Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

JCX BXC

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

If they don't have a competitive advantage then, yes, it is idiocy to invest in trying to turn the airport in to a hub. Dublin is not optimally located.
Ports developed throughout history because of where they were located.

Why exactly, Dublin's growth is outstanding and all signs point towards it climbing even further up the ranks as a European hub. It's ideally located for T/A pax. It is too far west for any significant Asian pax so it will be limited there, but that's it. What harm is it in trying to create a hub, if anything it will do more good than harm for Ireland.

18MonthsaSlave

Who is paying for this expansion other than people flying to/from the airport who don't use it as a hub?
Why should they bear the cost of this expansion or the government forego higher dividends while management at the airport pursue this quixotic adventure? The few million that they attract won't cover the cost of it.

L1011

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

The few million that they attract won't cover the cost of it.

Have you got the figures to back up this rather bold assertion?

Both traffic and costs, thanks.

Jamie2k9

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

Who is paying for this expansion other than people flying to/from the airport who don't use it as a hub?
Why should they bear the cost of this expansion or the government forego higher dividends while management at the airport pursue this quixotic adventure? The few million that they attract won't cover the cost of it.

News flash, transit passengers pay a transit fee, security fee, USCBP fee while airlines still have to pay runway and stand charges.

18MonthsaSlave

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

News flash, transit passengers pay a transit fee, security fee, USCBP fee while airlines still have to pay runway and stand charges.

Newsflash! It won't cover it and passenger charges for all travelling through the airport are put up to cover the cost of the new infrastructure which the majority won't benefit from.
Around here it is like trying to tell flat-earthers that the world is a globe floating through space.

L1011

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

Newsflash! It won't cover it and passenger charges for all travelling through the airport are put up to cover the cost of the new infrastructure which the majority won't benefit from.
Around here it is like trying to tell flat-earthers that the world is a globe floating through space.

Again, figures please.

You're so sure you've clearly got proof

18MonthsaSlave

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

Newsflash! It won't cover it and passenger charges for all travelling through the airport are put up to cover the cost of the new infrastructure which the majority won't benefit from.
Around here it is like trying to tell flat-earthers that the world is a globe floating through space.

Flat earthers ?! Have you read and thought about what you posted ?

Each passenger pays the same fee, whether it is transiting/hubbing or O&Ding, maybe check your facts before making wild assertions and then throwing names about when you "think" you are right. These fees/charges are paid through the ticket price. Think about it, using your logic Heathrow,Dubai,Atlanta,o'Hare,Amsterdam,Frankfurt and ANY airport wouldn't make any money using you rationale.

18MonthsaSlave

300 million quoted widely to build second runway and extend length of runway to cater for aircraft which visit hub airports.
Optimistically, if they attract 5 million more pasengers passing through Dublin as a hub that 300 million will take a long time to pay back so the others will have to pay and endure more overcrowding and inconvenience at peak times to boot.
Do you think the 14 or more so million Aer Lingus and Ryanair passengers are going to get any benefit out of that A380 stand ever?
This forum is full of aviation fanatics who don't care about the cost of infrastructure which other people are forced to bear so that they can indulge their own hobby locally.

L1011

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

300 million quoted widely to build second runway and extend length of runway to cater for aircraft which visit hub airports.
Optimistically, if they attract 5 million more pasengers passing through Dublin as a hub that 300 million will take a long time to pay back so the others will have to pay and endure more overcrowding and inconvenience at peak times to boot.
Do you think the 14 or more so million Aer Lingus and Ryanair passengers are going to get any benefit out of that A380 stand ever?
This forum is full of aviation fanatics who don't care about the cost of infrastructure which other people are forced to bear so that they can indulge their own hobby locally.

You said you wanted high quality connections to hubs. The A380 stand is for that. Runway capacity and length are needed for that.

You have a complete inability to maintain consistency in your shell argument here.

Jamie2k9

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

Newsflash! It won't cover it and passenger charges for all travelling through the airport are put up to cover the cost of the new infrastructure which the majority won't benefit from.
Around here it is like trying to tell flat-earthers that the world is a globe floating through space.

The only difference is largely the passenger security charge which point to point passengers pay to depart which you know requires staffing. Transit pay the same as others after that!

I assume you use FRA for all you flights, you know because it's the only viable hub in your eyes....

Do you think the 14 or more so million Aer Lingus and Ryanair passengers are going to get any benefit out of that A380 stand ever?

It will be there choice, if they chose EK or Euro hubs to connect. By the way it's not all about Aer Lingus and Ryanair.

18MonthsaSlave

L1011 wrote: »

You said you wanted high quality connections to hubs. The A380 stand is for that. Runway capacity and length are needed for that.

You have a complete inability to maintain consistency in your shell argument here.

An A380 stand isn't required at an airport which isn't and will never be a hub. Frequent connections to the hubs in Europe are what is required.

L1011

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

An A380 stand isn't required at an airport which isn't and will never be a hub. Frequent connections to the hubs in Europe are what is required.

Its required for flights to a hub, which is rather popular.

Have you managed to convince yourself that the DAA are putting it there to try sell onward connections on to Emirates or what?

18MonthsaSlave

A380s will not visit Dublin on scheduled flights therefore no need for an A380 stand from which passengers embark or disembark.

Idbatterim

An A380 stand isn't required at an airport which isn't and will never be a hub. Frequent connections to the hubs in Europe are what is required.

what are you on about ,it is a significant transatlantic hub. IAG want to route another 2.4 million passengers through it, Ryanair have a large amount of planes on order. Numbers will hit 25,000,000 or as good as this year, even if the growth rate falls from 15-10%, that would put us at 35,000,000 by the end of 2019!

L1011

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

A380s will not visit Dublin on scheduled flights therefore no need for an A380 stand from which passengers embark or disembark.

You are aware that (it seems) Emirates are planning a daily A380 rotation from next year?

You should be, as you're so sure of all your stats that you really must know what's going on with routes to hubs...

18MonthsaSlave

How much revenue has the state foregone in dividends from DAA for that momument to vanity?

L1011

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

How much revenue has the state foregone in dividends from DAA for that momument to vanity?

What "monument to vanity"?

lord lucan

18MonthsaSlave, please do not post in this thread again, you're clearly trolling. One more post and you'll be banned permanently from A&A.

trellheim

bump . Maybe discussed already but I am frequently stuck on an early morning departure from DUB and there is a huge queue of planes waiting for the takeoff runway. In calm weather with little wind why on earth don't they use the other runway as well to takeoff ?

possibly related but is takeoff time separation at Dub more than LHR ? Frequently seems like everybody gets a full minutes grace whereas at LHR they seem to go a lot quicker ( exempt Heavys but still)>

Chris_5339762

They do occasionally do dual departures (westbound and northbound), but it can be difficult to merge the northbound plane with all the aircraft that took off westbound and have now turned and are travelling east. Which is most of them!

Bebop

A question; Who pays for US CBP pre-clearance? is it the DAA or the Airlines?
Do other countries have pre-clearance at their main airports?

If Dublin can attract TA passenger traffic by offering it then why are other countries not getting in on the act?

Irish Steve

The departure separation delays are down to the problem that at certain times of the day, and the early morning is one of them, there are restrictions on how many flights the UK airspace system will accept from Ireland, so they can't all be released as rapidly as might otherwise be possible, the only thing that can ease things is departures to the west or south. There's none to the west that early, as the aircraft for the routes are not here early enough, and most European destinations still cross UK airspace for economic reasons, so there's not much potential for southerly departures to take the pressure off.

highlydebased

Bebop wrote: »

A question; Who pays for US CBP pre-clearance? is it the DAA or the Airlines?
Do other countries have pre-clearance at their main airports?

If Dublin can attract TA passenger traffic by offering it then why are other countries not getting in on the act?

Airlines are charged who pass it on in the ticket price.

Some canadian airports have it. It's not simply a case of an airport deciding they are going to introduce it overnight. It's a diplomatic process between countries involved and the US. The US are looking to introduce it more widely in europe including at LHR and Manchester http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/us-immigration-pre-clearance-is-extended-in-europe-north-asia-and-caribbean-but-at-what-cost-229961

JCX BXC

USPC will not be introduced to Heathrow according to many official figures, Inc Willie Walsh, the 5 terminals make it very complex and expensive to install.

Jamie2k9

Airlines pay for it like they would in the US and daa take an additional slice of the pie, €7.50 per passenger to cover some of costs on their end and investment.

trellheim

he departure separation delays are down to the problem that at certain times of the day, and the early morning is one of them, there are restrictions on how many flights the UK airspace system will accept from Ireland, so they can't all be released as rapidly as might otherwise be possible, the only thing that can ease things is departures to the west or south. There's none to the west that early, as the aircraft for the routes are not here early enough, and most European destinations still cross UK airspace for economic reasons, so there's not much potential for southerly departures to take the pressure off.

OK so why not my Manchester, Edi or Glasgow all being released onto the other runway as we're not crossing the London or Midlands areas

JCX BXC

trellheim wrote: »

OK so why not my Manchester, Edi or Glasgow all being released onto the other runway as we're not crossing the London or Midlands areas

Re-read it. The UK has a limit on the amount of flights it will except from Ireland, so whether it's going to Manchester, Edinburgh or London doesn't matter, its all the UK

L1011

Bebop wrote: »

A question; Who pays for US CBP pre-clearance? is it the DAA or the Airlines?
Do other countries have pre-clearance at their main airports?

If Dublin can attract TA passenger traffic by offering it then why are other countries not getting in on the act?

It's predecessor, immigration precheck, was brought in to make sure we wouldn't break the rules in terms of people turned back basically - we were a problem country for that at the time. It wasn't really considered needed for others and neither was it seen as an advantage. I think LHR had precheck in the terminal Pan Am used though, but it's long gone.

Now with many airports over multiple terminals, maybe divided by alliance, it's often impractical to put in a central area for CBP

FreudianSlippers

highlydebased wrote: »

Airlines are charged who pass it on in the ticket price.

Some canadian airports have it. It's not simply a case of an airport deciding they are going to introduce it overnight. It's a diplomatic process between countries involved and the US. The US are looking to introduce it more widely in europe including at LHR and Manchester http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/us-immigration-pre-clearance-is-extended-in-europe-north-asia-and-caribbean-but-at-what-cost-229961

AFAIK the fee for the ESTA goes towards it too (whether pre-clearance or clearance physically in the US).

Idbatterim

will the new PP likely seek a 3100 or 3600m runway? I have heard rumored on these forums that Cathay may start a Dublin - Hong Kong route.