Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

Options
1228229231233234293

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 68 ✭✭Paul2019


    Open to correction here but I understood that the South Gates (aka Passenger Boarding Zone or PBZ) is to be relocated a short distance to the south of where it is now on an extended apron when construction of Pier 5 begins.

    Wasn't there to be another equivalent PBZ close to the beginning of 28 R and a third one over on the West Apron.

    If true, it looks like DUB is planning on an expansion of an unpopular boarding experience.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,896 ✭✭✭Van.Bosch


    When is the second Runway expected to be fully operational? As in, when are the limited operating hours due to end?



  • Registered Users Posts: 352 ✭✭Snugbugrug28


    Isn't it some time in 2024?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,535 ✭✭✭Noxegon


    Can't come soon enough. On Friday night my flight waited the better part of an hour between door closing and take off, about half of that in a queue for the runway. I missed a train as a result :(

    I develop Superior Solitaire when I'm not procrastinating on boards.ie.



  • Registered Users Posts: 328 ✭✭dublin12367


    I also thought the south gates were to be retained and relocated when the new pier 5 is built. Although doesn’t look like that pier 5 is in any rush to be built so they (the south gates) will probably stay where they are for a while yet. Also agree

    Also agree the runway hours badly need to be extended. When it is fully operational, are we likely to see the same type of operation as Heathrow, eg. Changing between the two runways throughout the day or will the north just be used for take offs and south for landing in westerly winds? I would presume the residents are pushing for change throughout the day so each location gets a break?




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 355 ✭✭moonshy2022


    South gates will move over to where the current equine facility is. Essentially providing a similar busing situation as current but to support new stands built on south side of south area. Pier 5 will be built after the priority taxiway construction finishes in early 2024.


    Runway ops will be extended through June and July when works finish on ramp/taxiways area west of Pier 1.


    The answer to your second paragraph has been answered dozens of times in this topic already. Again, no change to current arrangement as this is dictated by planning and the DAA currently have no plans to request a change to that part of the planning.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,751 ✭✭✭Karppi


    With regard to the hours of use of the north runway, the original planning approval only approved its use between 0700 and 2300 local (amongst a number of conditions). daa applied for approval inter alia to change those hours to be 0600 - 2300 local. NB This doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be used, rather that it can be used.

    Permission was granted by Fingal CoCo but that was immediately appealed to An Bord Pleanala. The outcome of the appeal hasn’t been decided yet.

    I can’t post the Planning Authority’s webpage link due to a bot, but you can access it from the link at the bottom of this Dublin Airport page




  • Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭davebuck


    With EI USA traffic up 20% on 2019 levels surely the stand issue on the South gates must be a worry or stop future expansion for at least 3 /4 years until the new pier5 gates are available or have the DAA plans we're not aware of?



  • Registered Users Posts: 328 ✭✭dublin12367


    Would it really take 4/5 years to build the new pier?



  • Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭davebuck


    Yes if they apply for planning at the end of 2023 they'll be lucky to have permission by end of 2024 assuming objections and allowing for tender and build add another 3 years or so...



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,070 ✭✭✭xper



    Looks like they got permission last year for permanent retention of the south gates so that resolves that issue until Pier 5 goes ahead.

    Planning ref: F22A/0366



  • Registered Users Posts: 328 ✭✭dublin12367


    If it took less than three years to build T2 I highly doubt it will take three years to build one pier? Surely not.


    Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but if T2 was built with the intention of pier 5 being built at a later date, would the planning permission not already be there from the original planning? I hope that doesn’t sound like a stupid question.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,902 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Planning permission has a lifespan to completion. Also, you wouldn't be allowed build a building to 20 year old designs if standards had changed in the interim anyway.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,465 ✭✭✭✭cson


    I imagine future growth will be from managing the schedule - more PM departures.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,307 ✭✭✭bikeman1


    North runway closing time is being extended from 18:00 to 20:00 from June 1st according to DAA social feeds.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,535 ✭✭✭Noxegon


    I'd personally love to see the daytime JFK-DUB service back on the schedule. I used that a few times.

    I develop Superior Solitaire when I'm not procrastinating on boards.ie.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,465 ✭✭✭✭cson


    Definitely seems to be appetite for it to London anyway, I count no less than 6 day time departures NYC-LON these days.



  • Registered Users Posts: 779 ✭✭✭MICKEYG


    No clarity on a date for an earlier start.

    Flew to Edinburgh recently and spent more time taxing in Dublin than flying. Very frustrating.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,307 ✭✭✭bikeman1


    It really is frustrating. I noted that DAA said that the next phase is expected to happen from 01/07/2023. We can only hope that it is extending back to 07:00 which is really when it is needed. You will then have a bit of a hold up to 07:00, followed by a freeing up when the North runway comes into use.

    Part of me thinks the extension into the earlier hours (07:00 - 09:00) has not happened yet is to get the moaning residents used to flights on the North runway first, before disturbing their sleep in the morning. It's a different ball game on a Sunday morning when you have aircraft after aircraft blasting out overhead at 07:15 while still trying to sleep! Standby for even more complaints.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,769 ✭✭✭Captain_Crash


    Over half hour from push on the south gates this morning to departure….. it’s so frustrating!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 328 ✭✭dublin12367


    Is it just me, but as harsh as it sounds I’ve absolutely no sympathy for any of those moaning residents!!! They live beside an airport. What do they expect.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34,988 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    I suspect the real reason is that the morning rush is the most challenging time for ATC to get used to dual runway operations so they'll do that bit last.

    The Roman Catholic Church is beyond despicable, it laughs at us as we pay for its crimes. It cares not a jot for the lives it has ruined.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,751 ✭✭✭Karppi


    The trouble with the 0700 start on the new runway is that the first wave of departures is underway before then. Using two runways isn’t inherently complex but changing the operation in the middle of the busiest time for departures is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34,988 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Well yes of course the goal is to have both operational from 0600 (planning permitting) but is the IAA fully over the issues caused by the suspension of controller training during covid? The training must be quite lengthy.

    Also - yes a forced change in operations during peak period isn't ideal but it's something they have to be able to cope with, if one runway is temporarily unavailable for instance. Or switching runway direction due to winds. It's all pretty complex and I'm quite happy to be working in a job where nobody dies if I f*ck up 😉

    The Roman Catholic Church is beyond despicable, it laughs at us as we pay for its crimes. It cares not a jot for the lives it has ruined.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,732 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Irrespective of having dual departure runways, even separating the arrivals out would mean about a dozen arrivals not disrupting departures between 07:00 and 08:00.



  • Registered Users Posts: 352 ✭✭Snugbugrug28


    Does the extra capacity lead to less late arrivals at night time since the day's schedule is under less pressure.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,769 ✭✭✭Captain_Crash


    Not really no, the schedules are based on each airlines individual need! So it depends on where each flight is going/arriving from!

    Emirates for example have a late flight that arrives in Dubai just in time for the morning rush headed east!



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,902 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    The McEvaddys have given up on the private terminal 3 concept and have the land up for sale according to the Irish Times today



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,185 ✭✭✭goingnowhere


    It was common practice to allow departures on 28L and 34 in the morning wave subject to some conditions in the old days. Why can't we do that today if they don't want to use 28R?

    Compared to two nice separate parallel runways it seems like a far more complicated process by hey once again the passengers are not getting the benefits advertised and for all the talk about being greener a lot of Jet A-1 is being wasted sitting on taxiways queuing.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭EchoIndia


    We would need someone with the ATC perspective to comment on this but amongst possible constraints are the taxiway system, which relies heavily on the use of runway 34 as, in effect, a parallel taxiway to 28L. Take that away and you may have a new set of congestion issues on the ramp and remaining taxiways. Remember also the wingtip "collisions" around the holding points for the two runways where clearance between aircraft was tight. That can't have helped either.



Advertisement