Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Montréal Mirabel (YMX/CYMX)  
User currently offlineHeathrow From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 967 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 7185 times:

Looking recently, I'm a bit confused as to why YMX never worked. I understand distance was the issue, but there are a few things regarding that issue that would have solved it. The planning of the train there, which had an existing station, and the amount of parking was sufficient. STN and LTN are WAY out of London, HEL is in Vantaa, YEG is in Nisku...

So why did YMX fail? I miss that airport!

48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24075 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 7155 times:

This 2004 thread should answer your questions. There have been other YMX threads also.
A Tribute To Montreal-Mirabel Airport (YMX) (by Noise Oct 29 2004 in Civil Aviation)

YMX was doomed to failure from the beginning when they kept YUL open and split operations with international flights (except US) at YMX and domestic and US flights at YUL. That killed YUL as a connecting hub and encouraged several international carriers to suspend service to Montreal. Even Canadian carriers cut back their Montreal international services due to the loss of connecting traffic.

I used YMX quite often and it was a convenient airport. Even the distance from the city wasn't a major problem in my experience.

Ironically, YUL is now named for the Canadian Prime Minister (Pierre Trudeau) who was in office when the decision was made to build YMX and when it opened.


User currently offlinePITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3034 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 7093 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 1):

YMX was doomed to failure from the beginning when they kept YUL open and split operations with international flights (except US) at YMX and domestic and US flights at YUL.

 checkmark 

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 1):
I used YMX quite often and it was a convenient airport. Even the distance from the city wasn't a major problem in my experience.

I agree, but many people will suggest the airport is too far from the city. I don't see it that way, as the suburbs start only 5 or 6 miles from the airport boundary. It's in a good location with good highway access as Rt 15 ties the airport into the city's entire highway network.


One day, YMX will be back.



FLYi
User currently offlineHeathrow From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 967 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 7082 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 1):
This 2004 thread should answer your questions. There have been other YMX threads also.
A Tribute To Montreal-Mirabel Airport (YMX) (by Noise Oct 29 2004 in Civil Aviation)

I did a search, but none of the treads looked like they had any good info. There were too many threads to go through all of them.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 1):
YMX was doomed to failure from the beginning when they kept YUL open and split operations with international flights (except US) at YMX and domestic and US flights at YUL.

Why did they not just choose to throw them all in at YMX. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Dorval being so close to downtown Montréal, isn't that land a bit more valuable?

I've used YMX once when I was younger, and I liked it. That was back with TS on an L1011.

As far as connections went. the only would would really be AC (and CP back then), where YYZ was an option for those comming from the US or Canada.


User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1630 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 6951 times:

Long story short:

Another aiport for Montréal was planned in the '60s, when air traffic was booming, when Montréal was the entry point for European flights, and when aircraft did not have enough range to get to central or western USA from Europe. So, Montréal served as a stopping point along those roads, if I may say so, somewhat akin to a few Gulf cities, used by european carriers on the road to Far East. Fligths to Chicago and West Coast would land in Montréal.

During the search for the location of the future airport, at one point it was suggested that this airport could also be used by Ottawa's area citizens, which influenced the location selection. Mirabel was then planned to be a gigantic airport, with six terminals and six runways. Wikipedia shows two diagrams, one of the lands reserved for the aiport, and the second shows what was built and what was planned.

When the building was already started, the airlines got the right to fly directly to Toronto, which had already overtaken Montréal as Canada's largest city. Also, the 747 was coming on line, which promised longer flights, so making useless the stop in Montréal for flights from Central/west Coast USA to Europe. Everything could have been stopped then.

But no. It was continued, and Mirabel was opened yet never completed. One terminal, two runways. The rail connection was never built, nor the second motorway to Montréal nor the motorway to Ottawa. As was said, it is further from downtown Montréal than Dorval. That made the prospect of having short fligths moved to Mirabel unpleasant to the business community, and to AC, which had its main base at YUL. So, to be sure not to displease anybody, the worst solution was taken, to cut long-range fllying from short- and medium range, effectively making Montréal a double "cul-de-sac".

To make matters worse, air transport is mainly the responsibility of the federal government, whereas motorway building is mostly of provincial responsibility. And, be them independentists of federalists, Québec governments do not always work well with federal ones... So, Mirabel's development grew to a standstill, as more and more carriers decided to abandon Montréal...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montréal-Mirabel_International_Airport

At one point, to make matters look better, Mirabel was named "North terminal", whereas Dorval was called "West terminal". That never suppressed the few dozens Km between both airports... There were commissions, inquiries, all the stuff, the control of the airports was transferred to Aéroports de Montréal, which also had commissions and inquiries, all saying that Mirabel and Dorval should retain their current roles... During that time, we lost services from LH, SN, AZ, IB, TP, LO, SK, AR, SR... (I may forget a few, or make a few mistakes, but you get the picture).

So, at one point, there was almost nobody left at Mirabel but AF, BA, KL, CP and AC, plus leisure carriers (mostly TS). Then, somebody decided to pull the plug and bring back regular flights to Dorval, to AC's pleasure, and some times later, charter flights followed suit.

Montréal could still be used for correspondences, I believe, as we do receive flights from many US and Canadian markets, and also still have a decent selection of European services. All three alliances fly here, and we tend to be much less congested than Toronto. But I won't hold my breath.


User currently offlineHeathrow From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 967 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 6883 times:

Okay, that makes sense. However, it would seem to me, the YMX would have cheaper taxes, begging the question why airlines like TS (I know they held on 'till the end), SS, Z4 (were they even around for YMX?) didn't stay. I can guarantee if QN, 2T and WD were still around, they would msot likely favour YMX over YUL. As an ex. and future Gatineau (Ottawa) citizen, Montréal is the closest airport with any routes worth flying, and YMX would be so much easier for that purpose.

On another note, you say YMX was supposed to serve Ottawa as well. When was it decided to use YOW instead?


User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 6, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 6751 times:



Quoting Heathrow (Reply 3):
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Dorval being so close to downtown Montréal, isn't that land a bit more valuable?

Most definitely. While property values in Montréal tend to be lower than other major North American cities, one only needs to look to Denver to see what can be done with the land occupied by a major international airport.

Quoting Aircellist (Reply 4):
nor the second motorway to Montréal nor the motorway to Ottawa

The A-50 is going to be completed (eventually) which will technically connect the Ottawa area to Mirabel. Unfortunately, by that point YMX will be a water park (or whatever the plan is now) and the 50 will best serve as a shortcut for Ottawans to get to Québec City without having to go through MTL.

Quoting Heathrow (Reply 5):
On another note, you say YMX was supposed to serve Ottawa as well. When was it decided to use YOW instead?

I don't think YMX would ever replace YOW in full. Mirabel is still quite a bit over 100 km from Ottawa. Even with a complete highway link, it would still be an hour or more away from the city. Can you imagine taking a 45 min flight Toronto only to have to drive another 75-90 mins. Especially after having to get out to YYZ from downtown Toronto. Furthermore, YOW predates YMX as an airport. It has been in use since the 1950s when the airport was still known as Uplands and was a shared military/civilian facility.

However, it can be theorized that if the highway was constructed and YMX was still in operation, we might not have as much Caribbean/leisure traffic or even a flight to Europe (let alone two).

LH423



« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlineKoruman From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 3528 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 6705 times:

Yesterday's Mirabel is tomorrow's Singapore / Dubai / Hong Kong, or even Denver.

It is very foolhardy for anyone to erect an enormous airport on the basis that passengers will hub there because current aircraft lack the range to fly non-stop to the ultimate destination.

It killed Mirabel and Goose Bay (or was it Gander?) and sooner or later it will kill SIN and DXB too.


User currently offlineSflaflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1183 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 6581 times:



Quoting Koruman (Reply 7):
Yesterday's Mirabel is tomorrow's Singapore / Dubai / Hong Kong, or even Denver.



Quoting Koruman (Reply 7):
Yesterday's Mirabel is tomorrow's Singapore / Dubai / Hong Kong, or even Denver.

It is very foolhardy for anyone to erect an enormous airport on the basis that passengers will hub there because current aircraft lack the range to fly non-stop to the ultimate destination.

It killed Mirabel and Goose Bay (or was it Gander?) and sooner or later it will kill SIN and DXB too.

I disagree with this. SIN, DXB and HKG are HUGE financial centers. Montreal is not anymore. Yes they may not be connecting hubs anymore, but they sure are big population centers that are well run.


User currently offlineMarco From United Arab Emirates, joined Jul 2000, 4169 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 6542 times:

Also, even if range is eventually not an issue, it might not be financially viable for an airline to fly certain routues such as Dusseldorf to Cochin, or London Gatwick to Khartoum, or Osaka to Beirut or if which is why the EKs and Sq's will always have successful hubs!

Furthermore, Dubai is now a financial/tourism/exhibitions/conferences/media/aviation/healthcare hub for the region and more and more on a global level.

Regards
Marco



Proud to be an Assyrian!
User currently offlineFlitemax From Spain, joined Aug 2007, 249 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 6525 times:

Oh Mirabel, I miss thee !!

Those hanging flags, does anyone remember them?

It had such a neat and modern layout, was certainly ahead of its time.

Too bad the promoters bet everything that Montreal would become a prime hub in North America, which never happened for the reasons mentioned above.

I was a regular user of the airport (Royal Jordanian Tristar, AF 747s, KL, LH, and IB).

Mirabel years were the golden years! YEs, being nostalgic!


User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1630 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (4 years 10 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6356 times:

I believe the plan for Ottawa citizens to use Mirabel was mooted when Montréal was the point of entry. At that time, I suppose people from Ottawa had to ride to Montréal anyway, to take their flights to Europe. So, in that respect, having the airport at Mirabel, with the motorway, did cut some time, as opposed to driving to Dorval.

Now, as LH 423 said, the A50 will eventually be completed... Mirabel was used as Montréal's international airport from 1976 to 2004, we are in 2009 and the A50 which was included in the parameters of the original Mirabel plan still is not completed... Well...

Flitemax: I agree, there was something cool, airy, about Mirabel. But the planes were so far! So hard to see. The original terminal at Dorval, which was contemporary to the center of Schiphol and to Orly Sud, sported two observation decks, which were eventually closed, but at least the windows were kept, for some times...

Alas, as the fligths were repatriated in town, all the points from which you could see any part of the runway, from landside of the airport, were closed... Now, inside Dorval, we've got an obnoxious and windowless food court, almost worthy of an average shopping mall, except that the simplest sandwich is a complete rip-off.


User currently offlineMogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (4 years 10 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 6159 times:



Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 8):
Quoting Koruman (Reply 7):
Yesterday's Mirabel is tomorrow's Singapore / Dubai / Hong Kong, or even Denver.

It is very foolhardy for anyone to erect an enormous airport on the basis that passengers will hub there because current aircraft lack the range to fly non-stop to the ultimate destination.

It killed Mirabel and Goose Bay (or was it Gander?) and sooner or later it will kill SIN and DXB too.

I disagree with this. SIN, DXB and HKG are HUGE financial centers. Montreal is not anymore. Yes they may not be connecting hubs anymore, but they sure are big population centers that are well run.

I agree with Sflaflight and disagree Koruman. Montreal's metropolitan population is roughly 3.5-3.7mil. Hong Kong by itself is already 7.0mil, and another 4.0mil in urban Shenzhen just across the border (as close as SAN/TIJ). HKG can easily have that much air traffic by O&D alone.

YMX screwed up because of the whole YMX+YUL fiasco. Singapore/Hong Kong doesn't even have a second airport to allow such a screw up. And COS is soooo far from DEN that most Denver residents won't consider driving there to save that extra $20.


User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 10 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5923 times:



Quoting Heathrow (Thread starter):
Looking recently, I'm a bit confused as to why YMX never worked

Geez..

well

1, Montreal isnt really big enough to support 2 airports
2. No connections for international flights
3. Montreal economy suffered due to separatism


User currently offlineAntonovman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 719 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (4 years 10 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5834 times:



Quoting Flitemax (Reply 10):
Oh Mirabel, I miss thee !!

Those hanging flags, does anyone remember them?

It had such a neat and modern layout, was certainly ahead of its time.

i quite agree, it was a great airport
I loved the airport hotel opposite the terminal with all the waterways running thru the reception area


User currently offlineAntonovman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 719 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (4 years 10 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5825 times:



Quoting Flitemax (Reply 10):
Oh Mirabel, I miss thee !!

Those hanging flags, does anyone remember them?

It had such a neat and modern layout, was certainly ahead of its time.

i quite agree, it was a great airport
I loved the airport hotel opposite the terminal with all the waterways running thru the reception area


User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1630 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (4 years 10 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5820 times:



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 13):
3. Montreal economy suffered due to separatism

I was waiting for that one...

Mind you, even with the most federalist province, government, population, heck, even if Québec had been a completely anglophone province, and Montréal a completely anglophone city, sporting no difference whatsoever with the rest of Canada, even with a thriving economy, I can't see any way that this double airport system would ever have worked. Even with the very best political and economical conditions, the city is just too small, and has always been, for two big airports. Only truly big cities need more than one major airport. Add the weak division of traffic, and you don't need anything else to make everything bad.

True, the fear of separatism had something to do with some people and corporate headquarters leaving Montréal. But did it specifically cause the failure of an airport? No.

I would even go a bit further. Federalists prefer to say that it is separatism which provoked Mirabel's demise, because else, one could ask whether building Mirabel could have been a bad decision, based on a planning mistake... After all, this airport was one of the big projects of Pierre-Elliott Trudeau, the greatest federalist leader of the time.

Let's put it that way: if you believe JFK or EWR or LHR or CDG or MAD (or YYZ, for that matter) could succeed as they do now, with only international traffic, I will admit that it is separatism that caused Mirabel's failure.


User currently offlineEVA777SEA From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 10 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 5809 times:



Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 8):
I disagree with this. SIN, DXB and HKG are HUGE financial centers. Montreal is not anymore. Yes they may not be connecting hubs anymore, but they sure are big population centers that are well run.

No, NYC, London, and HKG are HUGE financial centers, SIN and DXB are not at the same scale as those cities. They have decent and respectable market sizes but are not in the same category. SIN, and now increasingly DXB, rely very heavily on connecting traffic. HKG may see a very slight drop in pax numbers when carriers are finally able to fly Taiwan-China directly (whenever that may be).

Quoting Aircellist (Reply 4):
Wikipedia shows two diagrams, one of the lands reserved for the aiport, and the second shows what was built and what was planned.

Wow! That airport looks like it could have easily handled 80 million pax a year! Did they actually expect to see numbers like that?


User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1630 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (4 years 10 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5624 times:



Quoting EVA777SEA (Reply 17):
Wow! That airport looks like it could have easily handled 80 million pax a year! Did they actually expect to see numbers like that?

You've got it! I believe there was some form of lunacy in that project.


User currently offlineHeathrow From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 967 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 10 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5600 times:



Quoting LH423 (Reply 6):
Can you imagine taking a 45 min flight Toronto only to have to drive another 75-90 mins

Where I currently live, i fly YYZ to YYC to YQU, then a 3 hour drive. 75 min is nothing  Wink

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 13):
1, Montreal isnt really big enough to support 2 airports
2. No connections for international flights
3. Montreal economy suffered due to separatism

I"m not suggesting running with 2 airports, I'm just curious as to why after Mirabel was built with the space to be larger and handle more traffic more efficient than Dorval, why it was dumped.

What sepratism? Québec is as much a part of Canada as Ontario, Alberta or the Yukon. There have always been sepratist movements, but no such seperation has happenned, or wil ever happen  Wink


User currently offlineBA84 From Canada, joined Aug 2004, 413 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (4 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5558 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I used to fly Finnair YMX-HEL-SVO in the 1980's.
I liked the airport and the hotel (then owned by Canadian Pacific).
What I didn't like were the 'people-movers', buses on stilts which took passengers from the gates to remote stands.

BA84


User currently offlineYulguy From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5553 times:



Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 13):
Montreal economy suffered due to separatism

Toronto displaced Montreal as Canada's largest metropolitan area in the 1970s. The process, however, was already underway from the 1960s. It was not so much to do with the rise of separatism as it was with a loss of its industrial base, partly brought about by the opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway in 1959, long before the Parti québécois took office. Ships could bypass Montreal and it lost part of its raison d'être, being a major transport and manufacturing hub for all of Canada. Yes, the election of a separatist government in '76 may have precipitated the movement of many of the country's head offices to Toronto; but it was happening already and probably would have continued anyway.

That being said, YMX was a fiasco. It was intended to be a super-hub for transatlantic flights, but four factors prevented this from happening:

1. Airliners could go longer without refuelling and, therefore, didn't need to stop in Montreal anymore.
2. The federal government ended the requirement for transatlantic flights to stop in Montreal.
3. YUL remained open.
4. Montreal's displacement by Toronto as largest city.



"Celui qui diffère de moi, loin de me léser, m'enrichit." - Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlineThenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2253 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (4 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5524 times:

People, let's get one thing straight !

In the long term, YMX will be back. ADM knows this, which is why they are keeping the airport (at least one runway and a few taxiways) open and functional. Think about it for a second. Why own and maintain a second airport, when it would be very easy to move all the cargo out of YMX to YUL, just as they did with TS, and sell YMX to the highest bidder. It would be a cost effective decision, yet they are not doing it (as far as i know), for the very simple reason that they want to keep YMX under their hands.

Don't look at the decaying terminal building. That building needs renovations anyways, and when the time comes, they'll build a new one. As for YMX now, well it is still a functioning airport.

Bombardier has decided to build the CSeries at YMX. Pratt & Whitney will open up a new engine line at YMX. The cargo facilities are still at YMX, which such airlines as FedEx, UPS, CargoJet, etc still using the airport every single day. Yes, NavCan closed YMX tower and replaced it with an FSS, but that is only due to slacking aircraft movements.

When, and not if, YUL becomes saturated, You will see YMX come back to life. It is already starting to happen, as it saw 12.5 million passengers in '08 (max capacity around 15 million passengers). There is only so much room for expansion at YUL. They are talking about expanding the international and transborder jetty to the west, and knock down the old TC hangars. That's all fine, but the gain that will bring the airport will be minimal. It will still be the same access road, the same clustered ramp up to the second floor for the check in, and the same line-ups during rush-hour at the security checkpoints. Even with the new transborder check in area beneath the Marriott, YUL will become saturated within the next 10-15 years. Sounds like its far away in the future, but it will hit YUL right in the face when it happens, because there is no more room to expand.

All this to say, YMX might be in a coma right now, but it will wake up once again. Just wait.

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineBravo1six From Canada, joined Dec 2007, 396 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (4 years 10 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5507 times:



Quoting Thenoflyzone (Reply 22):
In the long term, YMX will be back. ADM knows this, which is why they are keeping the airport (at least one runway and a few taxiways) open and functional.

Another theory is that the runway and taxiways remain active so that CRJ700/900/1000s don't have to be shipped to customers on trucks once they are built ; )


User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12420 posts, RR: 100
Reply 24, posted (4 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5466 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 1):
YMX was doomed to failure from the beginning when they kept YUL open and split operations with international flights (except US) at YMX and domestic and US flights at YUL. That killed YUL as a connecting hub and encouraged several international carriers to suspend service to Montreal. Even Canadian carriers cut back their Montreal international services due to the loss of connecting traffic.

Said early and well. Splitting hubs kills the connecting traffic. Yes... other economic reasons would have cut the traffic. But once the political decision was made to keep YUL open instead of scrapping it... YMX was doomed.

Quoting Heathrow (Reply 3):
but Dorval being so close to downtown Montréal, isn't that land a bit more valuable?

Its also more valuable for premium domestic traffic. Hence the political push to keep it open.

Quoting Koruman (Reply 7):
It killed Mirabel and Goose Bay (or was it Gander?) and sooner or later it will kill SIN and DXB too.

You can hope. But both of those airports serve a number of secondary markets. They'll adapt, survive, and even thrive. There will always be hubs. The challenge is to have a strong hub.

Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 13):
1, Montreal isnt really big enough to support 2 airports

 checkmark  It will not be in 15 years either. Look at LAX vs. ONT. ONT is downsizing tremendously in this economy. LAX is doing better (but not well), partially due to the estabilished market and partially due to the connections. At some point YUL must be closed for YMX to thrive. (Good luck getting the political will to have that executed...)

Quoting Thenoflyzone (Reply 22):
In the long term, YMX will be back.



Quoting Thenoflyzone (Reply 22):
YUL will become saturated within the next 10-15 years.

I broke up your quote for two reasons. YMX For manufacturing? Sure. As an airport? It will grow 25 years after YUL fills up. It is going to be too easy to offer better connections at other airports than in a split airport system. As EXAAUADL already noted, Montreal isn't a large enough metropolis to support two viable airports. During every recession there will be a contraction to YUL.

Mirabel is the poster child of how not to do an airport for many reasons. The wikipedia article on it has a good introduction.

Quoting EVA777SEA (Reply 17):
Wow! That airport looks like it could have easily handled 80 million pax a year! Did they actually expect to see numbers like that?

 yes  It was the DEN of its day. Built for decades of growth.  hyper  it could have served far more with modern terminals and the planned 6 full length runways (which could easily have been made 7).

But note: Quite a bit of land has been returned to the farmers. Mirabel is not going to be able to grow to six runways anymore.  Sad It probably could be built out to four though... If anything is to be made of it, the transportation and terminal options must be expanded dramatically. First step is ground transportation. To Hull and rail to Montreal. YUL would also have to be closed. Due to the miss-steps with YMX in the past, I doubt there would be any support to close YUL by either the airlines or Montreal based business.

Lightsaber



I've posted how many times?!?
25 Aircellist : How about speculating a bit more? There are two high-speed train projects of hich we hear, from times to times, in Montréal. One is the Québec-Montr
26 TheSonntag : Besides, I understand one of the two runways at Mirabel was permanently closed. Why have they done that? I know there is no demand for it, but still i
27 EXAAUADL : I dont think it was the sole or even a major reason but so many airlines left YMX between 1976 and 2004, that something was going on. Montreal had Ca
28 Bravo1six : It's closed, but it's still there (i.e., hasn't been torn up). The CRJ1000 prototype used that runway for high speed taxi runs.
29 Sebring : A lot of people blame Quebec nationalism and the exodus of anglophones and capital that followed the 1976 election win by the Quebec separatist party
30 Aircellist : Sebring: excellent post!
31 Pellegrine : I'm going to speculate even more. YUL doesn't have to close, it just needs to lose the international flights and YMX needs proper domestic/regional co
32 LH423 : That's the whole argument though. Montréal can't support service to two airports. Last year, YUL handled 12,8 million passengers. There just isn't e
33 Thenoflyzone : Well technically it is. AC830/831 operates YYZ-YUL-GVA-YUL-YYZ. Therefore constituting a direct same plane flight between YYZ and GVA. Thenoflyzone B
34 LH423 : True. I meant more in terms of connections. I mean, if you're trying to get from YEG to GVA, you're not going to fly YEG-YYZ-YUL-GVA when you can get
35 Viscount724 : And PTP.
36 Thenoflyzone : True, but still, through Star Alliance and its own metal, AC flies from YUL to LHR, FRA, CDG, ZRH, GVA, FCO and MUC (the latter two seasonally). Othe
37 YULWinterSkies : Which station? There has never been any train to YMX, just rails. There is currently something like 4 trains per day to the "city" of Mirabel, at wee
38 Bobnwa : I believe that LHR depends mainly on international traffic as does AMS which you didn't mention.
39 Flyyul : Dorval is fine. 1.) The runways arent saturated - and there are 3 2.) The new US terminal area opens - this means that the current space in the termia
40 Post contains links Aircellist : No, there is in fact a station in the basement of the terminal. The tracks are not going there yet. http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites...te-a-un-tr
41 Thenoflyzone : I was hoping to see that new check-in area in 2 weeks, as i have a flight to JFK, but they announced a delay in the opening of the area, due to the r
42 LH423 : Yes, and each of those markets has nonstops from YYZ. But again, I'm not comparing YUL to YYZ, I'm simply saying that in response to this: Montréal,
43 Brilondon : It failed because the politicians got involved. Only if Montreal wants it to. What should have happened is that YUL should have been closed and all f
44 Viscount724 : AC recently announced that YUL-FCO will become a year-round service starting this winter, with 3 flights a week during the off-season.
45 PITrules : Hwy 15 doesn't tie the airport into the region's entire highway network? One look at a map paints a different picture. I think this is important beca
46 Caribb : True but overwhelmingly most traffic to Mirabel will come up from south of the airport so that makes both highways 15 & 13 the two primary routes to
47 PITrules : Yes, but again I fail to see how this is different from many other airports around the world. At some juncture, there will be only be one expressway
48 Caribb : PITrules - In principle I agree with you. I'd add to my comments that YMX didn't fail because of one reason, it failed because of many. On the highway
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Late 80's El Al @ YMX Question posted Thu Nov 1 2007 13:43:05 by CF105Arrow
A Tribute To Montreal-Mirabel Airport (YMX) posted Fri Oct 29 2004 03:47:23 by Noise
Montreal-Mirabel Airport (YMX), One Month Left! posted Thu Oct 7 2004 03:18:14 by Noise
Ryanair + ReCAPTCHA = Al-Qaida posted Sun Jan 1 2012 23:22:23 by flyingbird
El Al B767-300ER 4X-EAM Enters Fleet posted Fri Dec 23 2011 00:40:12 by psimpson
El Al Emergency At OTP posted Wed Dec 21 2011 11:07:02 by radone
El Al Fleet News posted Wed Nov 16 2011 01:33:44 by omerlich
El Al Joining An Alliance? posted Sun Nov 6 2011 17:35:05 by staralliance85
El Al To Install Laser Defence To All Civil Airlin posted Sun Oct 30 2011 07:45:57 by readytotaxi
NY Times Article On Delta Cutting Hibbing Et Al. posted Wed Oct 5 2011 11:38:51 by simairlinenet