Vingt20cent From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 93 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4011 times:
I was at YYZ today and had some time to kill. I headed over to the new T1. It's a huge facility. I understand that it's not completed and won't be done for another couple of years.
I noticed that AC's domestic and international flights are serviced at T1. In addition, the STAR Alliance flights are stationed there as well, except UA. On the other hand, all of AC's US flights take off from T2.
Question #1: Once T1 is completely done, will there be enough "operations" to use all of T1? The terminal goes from Aisles A - Q (except I and O). . . is there enough business to use all the space?
Question #2: Will do they plan AC's US flight to move over to T1?
Question #3: Why did Westjet leave T2?
Oh by the way, I went to the infamous Wendy's parking lot on Airport Rd. Had a great time having my Frosty and watching planes hover over my head!
Jean Leloup From Canada, joined Apr 2001, 2116 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3948 times:
All of T2 will be going down, but that still will not 'fill up' T1 once everything is moved over, not even close. Of course, it makes sense that the GTAA would want to have extra space -room to grow- as it were, but I would agree with your implication that T1 may be too big (and too expensive) all the same.
I don't have the numbers offhand, so I hope someone will correct me here, but I think I've read that T1 when fully complete should be able to handle something like 40-45 million passengers per year, whereas the TOTAL traffic at YYZ is more around 30 million - and let's not forget that T3 is still active. Again, I may be way off, but I believe it's in that ballpark. So when will T1 really be full? Who knows, but I woudl say there's no rush to get the last sections completed.
By the way, yes, all AC flights will eventually be in T1 - the sooner the better, as T2 is not much of a terminal right now - already partly closed. You can see part of the transborder area of the new terminal which appears (At least) to be almost complete, alongside one of the sections already in use.
As for why WS left T2 - see above, it's not much of a terminal at the moment, and the demise of SG left a lot of vacancy over at the much newer and nicer T3. I'm not sure when WS hopes to move to T1, or even if they are hoping to do so at all at this point. I'm sure someone more knowledgeable will have some info on the matter, though.
Olympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3804 times:
Quoting Vingt20cent (Thread starter): Question #1: Once T1 is completely done, will there be enough "operations" to use all of T1? The terminal goes from Aisles A - Q (except I and O). . . is there enough business to use all the space?
I certainly hope not. You don't build a terminal to meet current demand. You build it large enough to be able to handle the traffic for the next 40 years or so.
Robsawatsky From Canada, joined Dec 2003, 597 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3708 times:
The long term goal is to have one larger terminal building at YYZ. T3 will be expanded and improved until the older part of it have reached the end of useful life. When T3 is expected to be "done for" is not stated, although it is sometime after 2015 and probably after 2020 if the charts that show T3 capacity through 2020 are to be believed.
Olympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3452 times:
Quoting AirbusfanYYZ (Reply 13): John, the final design calls for mega-terminal with 7 piers which will eventually replace the current T3. This will not be happening for at least another 15 years however.
15 years you say? I doubt if I'll be around that long so I won't worry about it
Lnglive1011yyz From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 1627 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3263 times:
Don't forget -- T1 AND T2 were built by the Government, and the day each of them opened respectively, they were already too small, and at a disadvantage technologically (advent of 747 / Jets for T1, etc).
The GTAA has built the terminal with the FUTURE in mind. Regardless of whether they hit the target dead on, and surpass it in terms of traffic growth, the GTAA will have a formidable option in the new T1 to keep things moving along.
People in general always have this "is it too big? Have we spent too much money?" attitude, with the lack of foresight being a major downfall.
Just look at the city of Toronto for a second:
For such a large city, our mass-transportation system is completely and utterly archaic. There should be subway lines *everywhere*.
The 401 was never built with expansion in mind, and look where we are today? Same with the DVP. We have *2* major arteries to get into and out of DT Toronto. That's it, with *no* room for expansion.
The fact that the GTAA has built T1 new with expansion in mind, actually makes me a feel a bit better about the decisions they make regarding the airport.
ExPedia From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 49 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3242 times:
The other thing to remember here is that this construction should bring a lot more international in-bond pax hubbing through YYZ as opposed to US hubs enroute to other countries - compliments of the increasing visa hassle the US is putting in place. (E.G. NRT-YYZ-EZE). This is in addition to domestic hubbing pax, YYZ origin growth etc. In 10 years, I doubt anyone will be saying that Pearson is too big. They might say it is too expensive, but not too big.
I went to this URL and ended up spending quite a bit of time reading about the airport master plan, then the Pickering project, then the Oak Ridges Moraine, then about the planned but never built expressways of Toronto, and then about GO Transit's proposed route expansions in the future. Thanks!
LHMark From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 7255 posts, RR: 44
Reply 21, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2696 times:
How old is T3? I'm surprised it may have a date with the wrecking ball. It's a fantastic terminal, with a good modern design and plenty of space. OK, the Int'l arrivals scheme sucks, but that's pretty common in airports throughout the world.
"Sympathy is something that shouldn't be bestowed on the Yankees. Apparently it angers them." - Bob Feller
Cruiser From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1002 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2541 times:
I thought that Westjet had already moved. I know that they are slowly demolishing sections of T2 already to make more room for T1. As well, the new hammerhead is progressing well, and should be ready next year, or the year after (cannot remember specific timelines).
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"