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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Dublin Airport New Runway/Infrastructure.

1173174176178179188

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭dublin12367


    The latest for Dublin airport.

    Daa have requested a 3 month extension to return a request for addional information relating to the infrastructure application. It was due in August. They have also sought a meeting with FCC to get points clarified which has been agreed in principle.

    The daa have announced huge incentives for airlines who can’t get slots and move from Dublin to Cork airport.


    St Margaret’s/ The Ward have lodged an objection relating to the mound improvement works citing it should be built on airport zoned land.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 515 ✭✭✭feelings


    I don't get The Ward residents objections to the mound improvements.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,614 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    I suspect they are going to object to everything, ever.



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,946 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    They claim that not having toilets there and only 22 car spaces isnt safe……..so they prefer the random layby full of cars instead….



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,085 ✭✭✭EchoIndia


    A survey carried out for daa and submitted with the PP application came up with occupancy/usage that didn't exceed 22 vehicles. However the proposal doesn't really allow for any additional attraction factor with a new, properly designed facility.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭Economics101


    No, I didn't get 10 L and R mixed up. I questioned why could 10R not be used for landings and 10L for take offs. I am assuming that the met conditions were not a constraint for take offs. Are the residents of Portmarnock a constraint for 10L take offs even when the weather is causing problems?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,608 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Scrap the cap!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,975 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    10R is the preferred runway for takeoffs when the wind is from the east. Per the planning restrictions 10L should only be used in exceptional circumstances - in other words if 10R isn’t available (maintenance usually).

    Yesterday they imposed single runway operations (dual runway ops is still an issue when there is low visibility) and that means use of the 10R/28L for both takeoff and landing unless it isn’t available.

    Basically 10L will only ever be used for takeoffs if 10R is unavailable or in an emergency.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,999 ✭✭✭Tenzor07


    NIMBYS!

    They must be the most well known residents group in the country with all their objections to anything that goes on at the airport.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭Economics101


    Thanks for a good summary of the situation. Basically there are two underlying causes of this mess: (i) the lack of suitable ILS for 10L for even moderately poor weather; (ii) the somewhat ridicluous planning conditions for the use of 10L for take offs, leading to single runway operations and heaven know how much delay, cost and emissions.

    Take offs from 10L would pass over Portmarnock about 4 miles from the end of 10L. Take offs from 10R are about 1 mile to the South. If there such an earth-shattering difference, especially for daytime operations?

    Its basically a big public scandal, and not being treated as such.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,349 ✭✭✭markpb


    I think your anger at CCPC might be pointed in the wrong direction. It says in the linked article that daa never asked them about leasing the site. They're a statutory authority, they respond to what is put before them. If daa don't bother to ask, they can't rule on it. The article also says that daa confirmed they don't want to lease it.

    It's worth remembering that CCPC's job is to ensure competition law is followed. Their job is not to make sure that people can drive to the airport. It is the job of daa to provide parking and access to public transport. It is Fingal's job to zone appropriately and it is the government's job to provide adequate public transport. This problem was not created by CCPC.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,608 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Single runway ops is nothing to do with lack of ILS or planning.

    Scrap the cap!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 370 ✭✭vswr


    yes they are, which winds the Ashbourne folk up immensely.

    Also, ATC operations on the south runway are Dublin ATC's bread and butter, so it's natural they revert to known procedures…

    This is meant to improve over time (you don't just stick in a runway and expect max capacity in all weathers)…. Assurance evidence needs to be built to show ATC can control safely and effectively. This may be 30 mins to 1 hr here and there for each type of restriction…. building up to 1 hr, then 2 hrs etc…

    This then needs to be reviewed and procedures updated iteratively… so will be a year or two before you see the north runway used effectively.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭Economics101


    In that case has it got to do with either lack of suitably trained staff, or navigion aids and/or ILS which is not fully commissioned? Given that it's about 2 years since the North runway opened, I'm not very impressed with this performamce.

    Any more excuses?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭dublin12367


    Planning permission for the north runway states in easterly winds 10R “shall be used in preference” over 10L for departures, and 10L used for landings, then if weather on a particular date like yesterday dictates that 10L is not approved for landings in the conditions but would be ok for departures, surely that would then over rule and satisfy the planning as it’s an operational need to use 10L for departures rather than just a preference?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,975 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    I’m open to correction, but my understanding is that the issue is related to maintaining dual runway ops once conditions pass a certain point, not the actual runway itself.



  • Registered Users Posts: 902 ✭✭✭3d4life


    "Take offs from 10L would pass over Portmarnock about 4 miles from the
    end of 10L. Take offs from 10R are about 1 mile to the South."

    The above is not usual as the prevailing wind is from the SW.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,798 ✭✭✭Beta Ray Bill


    Off Topic, but that award goes to a group of 8 or 10 people in malahide….



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,946 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    And that guy in Ongar (my sexist assumption is that the complainant is male)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 940 ✭✭✭Bussywussy


    North Runway closed again today, pathetic incompetence



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭Economics101


    To-day, winds are North West and 28L is the single runway in use. Why is 28R not used for take offs: what are the weather conditions which justify this? Or are there some other valid reasons?

    Real answers please, not excuses.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,875 ✭✭✭sparrowcar


    Completion of handback works on TWY N1 & N7 due to new ground charts becoming active this morning.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭IngazZagni


    I wonder why these works weren't carried out overnight.

    Has the airport given a timeline for when the north runway will be approved for conditions with low cloud and visibility first and then LVP conditions? We are rapidly approaching the 2nd anniversary of the new runway.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,085 ✭✭✭EchoIndia


    28R ops resuming shortly



  • Registered Users Posts: 151 ✭✭jwm121


    Are these incentives going to make a difference? Will we soon see Hainan A330s and 787s at Cork? Although, their flights are still on sale 2 weekly for the winter season even though it says they got no slots.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,608 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    I doubt you're being entirely serious but Cork is very runway constrained.

    Scrap the cap!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 261 ✭✭davebuck


    No anger on my side to be honest but I do find the whole timing be it the initial decision or appeals to be painfully slow across the likes of DCC,FCC,CCPC and ABP. Look at the parking for example the final decision is too late for another operator to get involved at this late stage in 2024. Just my opinion but surely therer's room for improvement while at the same time maintaining decent standards!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭dublin12367


    https://m.independent.ie/business/traffic-blocks-plans-for-high-tech-industrial-park-close-to-dublin-airport/a950919038.html

    Not strictly infrastructure related but the above article states Fingal CC have rejected industrial park due to road capacity…

    “would negatively contribute to a reduction in operational efficiency of the strategic road network,” said the local authority in its decision to refuse the new plans.”


    The cynic in me would think the infrastructure application could be liable to the same fate from Fingal…




  • Registered Users Posts: 222 ✭✭sandbelter


    I didn't want to raise this whilst the strike was on and risking of being accused or management scaremongering.

    But this just raises my concerns the long term damage to Dublin airport and Ireland generally by the cap may already be done.

    What there is little discussion on this site in the context of Aer Lingus in particular is the announced Spanish government's plan to make Madrid Europe's largest airport, and what this means for Dublin. Bear in mind, hitherto had shown the best growth profile in IAG.

    But, earlier this year the Spanish government announced plans to raise the capacity of Madrid airport with an aim to increase it's capacity to 90 mil pa, meanwhile Dublin argues about jump in an airport capacity to….. maybe 36 million??? Hardly a growth story…it seems at times planners are there to ensure Dublin Airport never loses the opportunity to make sure it loses an opportunity.

    In Madrid, the signs of change is already there, and its not just IAG.

    Ryanair has already leased the hanger it's struggling to build in Dublin.

    https://aviacionline.com/2024/01/ryanair-leases-largest-hangar-at-madrid-barajas-airport/

    The shift of the 321XLR to Iberia may prove more of a turning point than we realise, the point where IAG decided to double down on Madrid for it's growth a hub by connecting Latin America with Europe and Asia, Europe with Africa and North America and v.v.

    Aircraft are 25 year assets, and investors need to know the can use them for that purpose. Incremental increases by 4 million won't cut it….if it's announced…based on the growth we've seen for the first month this year, Dublin would push hard against a potential 36 million limit within months of it going into place.

    IAG's management has better things to do with its time than argue with Irish planners when there's an easier option in Madrid. Particularly if there's no guarantee of success and the above industrial park rejection implies.

    Any change to the cap must have a must have a growth story attached.

    Otherwise it’s only fair to ask DAA why are you building infrastructure for planes that will never land and don’t have the authority to?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭dublin12367


    I would tend to agree.

    daa should be planning the third terminal now to avoid reaching the future caps and getting stuck time and time again. The planning process for a new terminal will take years alone not to mention the construction time. The 2 (3) runways are there ready to be used. As soon as cap is lifted to 36m with nothing built and 40m with the extensions to T1&2, the new caps will likely be reached very quickly and we’re back to square one each time in a very short space of time.

    Passenger numbers from Jan to June are up 5% or nearly 1m passengers compared to 23. What could that have actually been without a cap..? Huge number of slots denied for winter 24/25 as a result.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭Qaanaaq


    A lot of what you say is correct. I think that with LHR constrained IAG needed DUB and MAD to provide the growth for the future. But now there is doubt about DUB's long term certainty to provide that growth. Even if they get over this planning hurdle, the seed has been sown now to raise doubt on future developments that require planning. Every single planning application no matter how small will be objected too and distorted reporting by the media. Then you have the chain reaction of politicians reacting to the distorted media reporting to suit their own agendas.

    We have a brand new runway in place so it's a real shame.

    I doubt though if IAG wants all its eggs in just one single basket in MAD though. I think they could look for another HUB to provide growth if DUB is uncertain.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭Economics101


    Appears from FR24 that single runway ops are in use again. About 9 aircraft queued up for takeoff on 10R. Weather shows few clouds at 800 feet, scattered at 1200 and broken at 1400.

    Is 10L not able to operate in these very undemanding conditiond? Or is there something else going on?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 361 ✭✭orionm_73


    A walking inspection of 10L/28R was taking place.

    Post edited by orionm_73 on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,085 ✭✭✭EchoIndia


    Notice re inspection.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,085 ✭✭✭EchoIndia


    DAA not so happy with the FCC response to their planning application for an off-airport viewing facility. A good example of how the planning system can impede rather than facilitate even a simple proposal.

    https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/dublin-airport-authority-reconsidering-offer-to-build-an-observation-deck-for-plane-spotters/a887454628.html



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭IngazZagni


    It's just part of the wider issue that is our planning system. It's not fit for purpose. It is preventing development all over the Country. People trying to justify their jobs in councils with such nonsense.

    Fingal would prefer the current dangerous unofficial viewing area than this proposal. Who would pay for the toilets upkeep? The daa? They absolutely should not entertain this idea and scrap the plan in that case.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,506 ✭✭✭donkey balls


    What about the lad who was objecting to a Data center being built and he didn't even live in the actual county.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭dublin12367


    What do Fingal County Council get from this? Are they trying to prove a point to the daa and being awkward for the sake of it? How does St Margaret’s have such much influence on FCC?

    Similar with the infrastructure application, a very important, time sensitive application and they requested further information on 85 points if I remember correctly which it’s going to take 9 months for the daa to provide said information.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,085 ✭✭✭EchoIndia




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,829 ✭✭✭Captain_Crash


    At this stage the DAA could offer to pay the over costs of the NCC & end world hunger & FCC would still find reason to deny it. There really needs to be a discussion at government level about how much sway a local authority can really have on such a vital piece of national infrastructure.



  • Registered Users Posts: 121 ✭✭Thunder87


    Problem is the alternative is probably direct applications to An Bord Pleanala who are an even bigger farce.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭dublin12367


    At the very least it would cut out some of the delays if all applications went direct to An Bord Pleanala. Almost all decisions in relation to Dublin airport from FCC regardless if they are approved or rejected ultimately end up with ABP anyway.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭Economics101


    But when special strategic housing developments went straight to ABP, the result was loads of judicial reviews, so this scheme had to be scrapped.

    What about rigidly-binding timelimits for planning and appeal decisions, following which permission is automatically granted? That would make the Councils and the ABP move their arses and not hold up virtually all cases an unconscionable amount of time.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭Economics101


    Another Fingal V DAA disagreement:

    https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/permission-refused-for-large-staff-car-park-at-dublin-airport/a280892418.html

    At this stage it looks like FCC are guaranteed to oppose everythng from DAA.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 940 ✭✭✭Bussywussy


    I'm actually delighted. Would of made anyone working there's day a bit longer, I'm happy enough where I park at the moment 🤣🤣



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭Economics101




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,614 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Its replacing on-campus parking with parking that's a ten minute bus ride away



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,981 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Nothing will be done before the election but straight after the election the whole planning system has to be upended. We can't get anything done.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 261 ✭✭davebuck


    There does seem to be a policy with FCC on every planning application from the DAA in the last few years to either reject or request large amounts of additional information be it rightly or wrongly. This makes any attempt to provide the infrastucture more costly and with big delays.I'm not suggesting give the DAA a free hand on planning applications etc. but surely after the next election the planning procedure most change to improve the overall delivery timelines, Dart + and Metrolink are more examples of crazy planning delays. A minister in charge of large scale transport and other essential infrastucture projects is badly required and also who controls or regulates the likes of FCC/DCC to ensure their planning decisions are reasonable?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,092 ✭✭✭Blut2


    There should be an arbitrary cut off point where any project with a budget over €100mn (or €200mn, or some other very large figure) the approval request goes to and comes straight from a cabinet minister in charge of national level infrastructure/development projects.

    Having to waste years going through county councils and ABP where some local NIMBY crank or overly fastidious junior bureaucrat can delay or cancel a project that would benefit the entire country is an absolutely bonkers system that everyone can see just isn't working.

    Most obviously/relevantly here in the problems with DUB's completely ridiculous capacity limits and delays to efforts to improve infrastructure.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement