Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

Idbatterim

Jamie in my opinion people care more about time than distance. I reckon three services per hour and Half hour journey time Would be acceptable...

Jamie2k9

Idbatterim wrote: »

Jamie in my opinion people care more about time than distance. I reckon three services per hour and Half hour journey time Would be acceptable...

I really wouldn't, my distance comment was in relation to times quoted ex London airports to city center rater than specific to DUB.

DUB really needs a minimum of 6 per hour to cater for demand and operating at a time when they are needed, Allow IE in charge and you won't get a service before 06.00 when in fact 30,000 odd could do with it from 04.00.

Irish Rail should not be allowed touch a service.

IMO doing it with a spur would be typical Ireland spend little now and be forced to spend billions more down the line, like Red/Green tram link up.....

Thankfully the NTA have actually made a good decision for once and ruled it out.

Idbatterim

I really wouldn't, my distance comment was in relation to times quoted ex London airports to city center rater than specific to DUB.

DUB really needs a minimum of 6 per hour to cater for demand and operating at a time when they are needed, Allow IE in charge and you won't get a service before 06.00 when in fact 30,000 odd could do with it from 04.00.

Irish Rail should not be allowed touch a service.

IMO doing it with a spur would be typical Ireland spend little now and be forced to spend billions more down the line, like Red/Green tram link up.....

Thankfully the NTA have actually made a good decision for once and ruled it out.

I totally agree about the joke that is IR. Couldnt there be a previso though, that proper run times, like you suggested, or no spur.

In terms of capacity, an eight carriage dart can take 1800 passengers if I am not mistaken. at the hours of the morning you are speaking of, couldnt loads of darts be run, up until the other services start, i.e intercity and commuter?

Ideally you would run the dart and metro north to the airport, in my opinion. If MN wont be realised for another ten years or so, IF EVEN, do you not reckon this option for the short-medium term is a goer?

Irish Steve

With the way that traffic volumes around the general area of the M1, M50, Airport and Swords are changing, there will come a time sooner rather than later where an alternative to road as being the only way of getting in and out of the airport will be essential, to the extent that before too much longer, a rail access to remote car parking will be needed, unless DAA are going to build multi storey car parks, the present concept of tarmac covered fields can only go so far before it becomes uneconomic to provide transport links by bus.

Pretty much every other airport in Europe that handles the sort of numbers that now are using Dublin already has a rail connection of some sort, in some cases there are multiple rail based options, not just because of making access easier, but also to help reduce the carbon footprint of the area, Heathrow already has significant air pollution problems in the airport area, and it's not the number of flights that are causing it, it's the number of road vehicles concentrated in a relatively small area that's creating the problems.

Jamie2k9

Idbatterim wrote: »

I totally agree about the joke that is IR. Couldnt there be a previso though, that proper run times, like you suggested, or no spur.

In terms of capacity, an eight carriage dart can take 1800 passengers if I am not mistaken. at the hours of the morning you are speaking of, couldnt loads of darts be run, up until the other services start, i.e intercity and commuter?

Ideally you would run the dart and metro north to the airport, in my opinion. If MN wont be realised for another ten years or so, IF EVEN, do you not reckon this option for the short-medium term is a goer?

Without getting bogged down into specifics an 8 carriage DART wouldn't hold that many. The bussiest today which I understand to be an 8 set carries 1,350 and that is really packed (500 or so seated), consider passengers with cases and realistic standing number it likely falls to 1,000.

As for what I think, it has some positives but no because it would just 200-300 million to build and another 200 million or more on new rolling stock as it's scare as it is once the 10 minute DART starts. So likely speeding around 25% of the re designed MN cost. If it went ahead it would end MN for good IMO.

Best hope is MN is advanced by a few years through a form of new financing from EIB but I suspect the next election will tell a lot whenever it happens.

afatbollix

They should build both and a link back through Swords so that northern trains could stop too.

Not everyone wants to go to central, It would cover a lot of Dublin by getting the Dart and commuter trains on it. Dublin needs MN too.

Idbatterim

Just came across the below articles in the times today, a380 is mentioned and also that they are going to further increase capacity up to a 428 seat aircraft on the dublin to dubai route...

Emirates high-flyer worries about Dublin Airport’s capacity constraints
As airline increases Dublin-Dubai capacity, Enda Corneille says third terminal inevitable

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/emirates-high-flyer-worries-about-dublin-airport-s-capacity-constraints-1.2853695

lawred2

lawred2 wrote: »

can a 380 even land a DA?

Yes

goingnowhere

Parking is the problem, plus A380 could not make a max weight (or anything close to max weight) takeoff out of Dublin

Balf

goingnowhere wrote: »

A380 could not make a max weight (or anything close to max weight) takeoff out of Dublin

Indeed, although we probably should recall that the A380 needs less runway than a Boeing 747 and Dublin has had scheduled 747 services in the past, with obvious limits on the range and loads on those services.

http://planes.axlegeeks.com/compare/242-280/Airbus-A380-800-vs-Boeing-747-400ER

Takeoff Field Length Winner: Airbus
The Airbus can take off with 457 fewer feet of runway than the Boeing.

Landing Field Length Winner: Airbus
The Airbus can land with 1,889 fewer feet of runway than the Boeing.

Irish Steve

goingnowhere wrote: »

Parking is the problem, plus A380 could not make a max weight (or anything close to max weight) takeoff out of Dublin

Rather than just make a broad sweeping statement, it would be helpful if you stated some facts, given that you are making a somewhat inaccurate statement. The 380 needs 9000 Ft for a MAX Take off weight, and Dublin is at present only 350 Ft below that, so while a MAX weight T/O is not possible, it won't be that much limited, and less limited than the 747 family.

The planned new runway is going to be 10,203 Ft, so capable of taking a MTOW A380 operation, but that is unlikely to be a requirement, as such a configuration would only be required for a very long haul flight, which is unlikely for flights from Dublin.

Captain_Crash

goingnowhere wrote: »

A380 could not make a max weight (or anything close to max weight) takeoff out of Dublin

The only A380 route DUB is ever likely to see is EK to DXB which is nowhere near MTOW on an A380. And as Irish Steve noted, 28 is very close to the length needed for an MTOW 380 anyway, at I'm presuming 15 Celsius.

(I'll go against the grain and give a prediction that we wont see 380 ops in DUB anytime soon. I believe the DAA aren't interested)

Jamie2k9

dropzone wrote: »

I think there is a new swing gate area being put in at 410 from the markings they have on the ground, which might explain a new stairs, I presume it will be coming from USCBP, I could be wrong though.

Guess this explains why EY got the boot from T2!

Jamie2k9

P4 (works) Planning App

It is proposed to carry out material alterations to the existing Pier 4 and construct a three storey extension to the Pier to aid with passenger circulation. The material alterations within the existing pier include the provision of glazed screens accross the Pier at Level 15 to separate passengers on each side of US customs and border protection, as well as the provision of two walkways at Level 20.

P1

It is proposed to construct an extension to the existing Pier 1. The extension will consist of a ground floor which will be used as departures area. The extension also consists of 4 Roof Top Plant Rooms. In addition, material alterations are being carried out to construct a retail unit and toilet area on the ground floor of the existing pier.

http://www.fingalcoco.ie/planning-and-buildings/apply-or-search-for-a-planning-application/view-or-search-planning-applications/

Stealthirl

I thought gate and taxiway shoulders were the main A380 issues along with wing clearance

Irish Steve

Stealthirl wrote: »

I thought gate and taxiway shoulders were the main A380 issues along with wing clearance

They have been highlighted as issues that will need to be addressed if 380's are going to operate regularly through Dublin.

It is my understanding that with special handling to ensure clearances and remaining on firm ground, 380 operations can be handled now using remote parking

Idbatterim

I realise Dublin needs a new runway, due to traffic, but if the current runway, still had adequate capacity, could 10-28 not be lengthened by several hundred meters, very easily, but just extending it up further to the R122?


https://www.dublinairport.com/latest-news/detail/runway-upgrade-to-create-150-construction-jobs

Runway Upgrade To Create 150 Construction Jobs

Full resurfacing of airport’s existing main runway will take 18 months of night works

One hundred and fifty construction jobs are to be created at Dublin Airport in a major project to upgrade the airport’s main runway.

The overhaul, which includes a complete resurfacing and the installation of new ground lighting systems, is essential to ensure that Dublin Airport’s main runway can continue to operate safely.

Runway 10/28, which opened in 1989, typically handles 95% of all flights at Dublin Airport and is a critical element of Ireland’s infrastructure. This is the first time in its 27-year history that the runway has had a full overhaul.

The work is required to ensure that the main runway continues to meet the strict regulations governing the operation and specification of runways at major airports.

This construction work will start today and will take place overnight between 11pm and 5am for up to 18 months. This work can only be undertaken at night as it requires the full closure of Dublin Airport’s main runway.

“This is an essential investment in the future of Dublin Airport and in the future of the Irish economy,” said Dublin Airport Managing Director Vincent Harrison. “Our main runway has been the workhorse of Dublin Airport since 1989 and has allowed the airport to grow from five million passengers per year to a record 25 million passengers last year,” Mr Harrison added.

“More than four million aircraft have taken off or landed on our main runway during the past 27 years and it’s now in need of a substantial overhaul.”

While the night-time construction works are ongoing, flights will use Dublin Airport’s secondary runway, which is also known as the crosswind runway. Runway 16/34 has been the airport’s secondary runway since 1989 and typically handles about 5% of total traffic at the airport.

The work, which is weather dependent, is due to take place every weeknight for the next 18 months. It will involve a full resurfacing of Runway 10/28, which is 2,637m long, with three new layers of asphalt. The project also includes replacing the ground lighting system for the runway with new LED lights, which will reduce energy consumption by about 66%.

There will be no new flight paths used during the construction programme, but the work will increase the usage of some existing flight paths.

Runway 16/34 has two flight paths for arriving and departing aircraft. The R16 flight path brings aircraft over rural areas of North Dublin, while the R34 approach brings aircraft over South Dublin.

The Irish Aviation Authority (IAA), which has responsibility for air traffic control services, has given a commitment that during the construction works the preferred inbound flight path for Dublin Airport’s secondary runway will be the northerly R16 approach, which brings aircraft over the least populated areas. The southerly R34 approach will only be used if required due to wind direction – as aircraft must land and take off into the wind.

Upgrading the main runway is a complex logistical project as construction teams will overhaul a portion of the runway every night before it is handed back to operations early each morning in time for Dublin Airport’s busiest time of the day. The window for construction is only about four hours per night, due to the set up process required and the meticulous preparations for returning the runway to normal operations every morning.

Last year Dublin Airport had almost 198,000 landings and take-offs, with 95% of aircraft using the airport’s main runway.

Cessna_Pilot

I cannot for the life of me understand why the works aren't running from midnight to 6am local instead of 11pm to 5am when a lot of arrivals would be coming in.

Jamie2k9

Cessna_Pilot wrote: »

I cannot for the life of me understand why the works aren't running from midnight to 6am local instead of 11pm to 5am when a lot of arrivals would be coming in.

because the runway is needed from 05.00....

lambayire

That grumpy chap on the southside will be apoplectic with rage when he reads this one.

JCX BXC

Cessna_Pilot wrote: »

I cannot for the life of me understand why the works aren't running from midnight to 6am local instead of 11pm to 5am when a lot of arrivals would be coming in.

Transatlantic arrivals start from very early, around 5am, I'd imagine that's the reason.

Cessna_Pilot

JCX BXC wrote: »

Transatlantic arrivals start from very early, around 5am, I'd imagine that's the reason.

Could well be, but a lot of Aer Lingus and Ryanair land around 2300. But makes sense with 28/10 being the longer runway for the transatlantics!

Cessna_Pilot

Cessna_Pilot wrote: »

I cannot for the life of me understand why the works aren't running from midnight to 6am local instead of 11pm to 5am when a lot of arrivals would be coming in.

A number of heavies and most of Ethiopians operations will only take 10/28. Where as all mediums will happily take 16/34 within reason.

What happens if the runway is late coming back to ATC, traffic starts to build from 0615 the last thing you want to be doing is reorganising yourself just before the busiest part of the day. Whereas at 0500 you can take a delay in its return with no impact.

jamo2oo9

Deleted User wrote: »

A number of heavies and most of Ethiopians operations will only take 10/28. Where as all mediums will happily take 16/34 within reason.

What happens if the runway is late coming back to ATC, traffic starts to build from 0615 the last thing you want to be doing is reorganising yourself just before the busiest part of the day. Whereas at 0500 you can take a delay in its return with no impact.

They're arrivals so they don't require 28/10 to successfully land. They just can't take off within the expected loads from 16/34.

Airport isn't shut down. 16/34 is being used during the night for any late night arrivals/departures.

The earliest heavy departure is at 8:30am going to Abu Dhabi. Not 100% sure what time does the EI A330 goes to Malaga but if it's in the morning, that leaves at 7:10am.


So that means, between 5am and 7am, the airport is catering light departures and arrivals and heavy arrivals only.

AndyBoBandy

Deleted User wrote: »

What happens if the runway is late coming back to ATC,

You'd imagine they have a buffer in place, say all work to finish by 4 with the last hour clean up & inspection, or if something hasn't started by a certain time on any evening, it doesn't get done that night.

works like this, there is no room for error, the runway absolutely must be operational again by 5am, so I'm sure they'll have plans in place.

jamo2oo9

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

They're arrivals so they don't require 28/10 to successfully land. They just can't take off within the expected loads from 16/34.

Correct they don't but a number of EI heavies will opt to land on 10/28 and will hold for it. Ethiopian procedures are to land on 10/28 where possible

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

Airport isn't shut down. 16/34 is being used during the night for any late night arrivals/departures.

I didn't say it was

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

The earliest heavy departure is at 8:30am going to Abu Dhabi. Not 100% sure what time does the EI A330 goes to Malaga but if it's in the morning, that leaves at 7:10am.


So that means, between 5am and 7am, the airport is catering light departures and arrivals and heavy arrivals only.

Correct

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

You'd imagine they have a buffer in place, say all work to finish by 4 with the last hour clean up & inspection, or if something hasn't started by a certain time on any evening, it doesn't get done that night.

works like this, there is no room for error, the runway absolutely must be operational again by 5am, so I'm sure they'll have plans in place.

You'd be surprised how close they push it each night. It only needs to be back at 5am for the arrivals. Where as if it was a 6am finish delaying the first wave has day long knock on effects.

AndyBoBandy

Deleted User wrote: »

You'd be surprised how close they push it each night. It only needs to be back at 5am for the arrivals. Where as if it was a 6am finish delaying the first wave has day long knock on effects.

16/34 wouldn't be suited too well for that many arrivals in the morning in terms of taxiways either would it?

LXFlyer

jamo2oo9 wrote: »

They're arrivals so they don't require 28/10 to successfully land. They just can't take off within the expected loads from 16/34.

Airport isn't shut down. 16/34 is being used during the night for any late night arrivals/departures.

The earliest heavy departure is at 8:30am going to Abu Dhabi. Not 100% sure what time does the EI A330 goes to Malaga but if it's in the morning, that leaves at 7:10am.


So that means, between 5am and 7am, the airport is catering light departures and arrivals and heavy arrivals only.

Ethiopian goes earlier - departure times are 05:55 for the LAX flight, and 05:20 and 05:30 for Toronto and Washington.

Irish Steve

There's a substantial number of freight flights arriving in the early period, and a number of them now are wide body aircraft that are better suited to 10/28, and there is also the consideration that 10/28 is the CAT 3 runway, 16 is Cat 1, and 34 has no precision approach aids, so a very limiting factor for reliable operations.

The problem with lengthening the runway is that whichever end is chosen for the extension, the ILS localiser and glideslope systems will be out of commission for a considerable period of time while they are removed, and reinstalled in the new position, and the same is also true for the landing lights and approach lights, so extending the runway has a lot more involved than just putting down a few hundred metres of concrete, the other civil works related to the extension will take as much time as the actual digging and putting down of the actual surface, as that can only be done when the runway is closed, due to the risks of an accident breaching the work area.

There is also the problem that extending the runway will mean that the approach lights will no longer fit within the airfield boundary, so that will mean all manner of complications in terms of dealing with the road crossing, the road will either have to be diverted, or lowered into an underpass in order to keep the lights at the right levels, depending on which end is chosen for the extension. It would be cheaper to move the western end, as that's a narrower road, and there's nothing other than the cost of the land to prevent the road being diverted further away.

Having said that, given that 28R will be longer, there's no pressing need to extend what will become 28L, it will be much less disrupting to wait for the new runway, given that right now there's no critical urgency for max weight operations off 28(L) that we are aware of.

AndyBoBandy

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

16/34 wouldn't be suited too well for that many arrivals in the morning in terms of taxiways either would it?

It would handle the arrivals alright but after 0630 it would be a nightmare.