YTZ to have preclearance by 2023; targeting LGA, ATL, BNA, MSP, PHL, RDU, BWI, and PIT by 2025
https://www.thestar.com/business/2021/1 ... affic.html

In a report issued last week, Nieuport Aviation, the company that owns the passenger terminal at Billy Bishop airport, said it expects total passenger traffic to jump from 3.3 million in 2022 to 4.6 million in 2023 with the inclusion of a preclearance facility.

Good for YTZ, although I thought they were fairly maxed out in terms of slots (part of the reason for the E-jets & whatnot). Although I presume these US markets are would be a lucrative of slots than, say, Timmins.

Indeed, per the Star:

Despite the intended surge in traffic, the airport’s ability to meet market demand is still constrained by flight limits imposed by Ports Toronto, according to a report issued by Nieuport last week.

(mods, please delete/move if needed)

I think YTZ is too small to build preclearance facilities

chunhimlai wrote:

I think YTZ is too small to build preclearance facilities

Did you read the article? The plans are ready to go, it's just a matter of final approval from Ottawa.

Interesting that most of the cities they are targeting for new service have FIS facilities. Only LGA would be a new destination without a FIS currently. Maybe their clientele prefers pre-clearance but as a US citizen I find it to be a pain since it means arriving at the airport earlier.

I'll take pre-clearance anytime vs FIS at a US port of entry with passengers from 20 other flights waiting for a customs check. Arrive home and walk out a standard gate and in my car.

LGA is definitely the prize. As far as LGA is concerned AC is the only one who could operate this route tomorrow. Both PD and WS would have to acquire slots on either end. No American carrier that operates NYC-Toronto has turboprop in their fleet for a YTZ operation. So this route in theory would be Canadaian dominated.

jjbiv wrote:

Interesting that most of the cities they are targeting for new service have FIS facilities.

Well, of course they do. Other than LGA (with PANYNJ's practice of pushing international to JFK and EWR), it's really only tertiary airports in the U.S. that lack FIS. Even Lansing, Michigan (#220 in U.S. airports in domestic passenger count) is a Port of Entry.

According to this link, due to the new 2016 preclearance agreement between Canada and the US, it is now up to the Canadian airports to pay for the US CBP preclearance facilities. That was not the case for the existing preclearance facilities at YYZ, YUL, YVR, YYC, YEG, YWG, YOW and YHZ.

This is why airports like YTZ and YQB will have a tougher time getting their US CBP facilities up and running. They will need Canadian government funding to make it happen. Good luck !

I'll believe it when I see it.

Who wants to fly MSP/RDU/ATL-YTZ on a Q400? I guess being able to skip U.S. immigration is the consolation for having your skull rattled for 2+ hours. That, and free beer.

jjbiv wrote:

Interesting that most of the cities they are targeting for new service have FIS facilities. Only LGA would be a new destination without a FIS currently. Maybe their clientele prefers pre-clearance but as a US citizen I find it to be a pain since it means arriving at the airport earlier.

As said pre-clearance is much more efficient that immigration at US airports and US carriers can have Canadian flights with domestic gates also AC can be in the same terminal as UA and WS with DL.

My only experience is YYZ for pre-clearance and for US immigration at US airports I have been through LAX, SFO and BOS and SFO the latter took over an hour. This is because of some Asian flights landing around the same time my flight from SYD landed. This was back in 2012

IIRC Porter does serve IAD (or they did). They would probably start serving DCA from YTZ when this arrives provided there are slots available.

2eng2efficient wrote:

Who wants to fly MSP/RDU/ATL-YTZ on a Q400? I guess being able to skip U.S. immigration is the consolation for having your skull rattled for 2+ hours. That, and free beer.

WS has been doing BNA-YYZ on DH4s against AC jets for years. The massive convenience advantage of YTZ just makes it easier. The last time I flew PD from the US I was on the mainland 20 minutes after we landed with checked bags and without NEXUS. Sometimes at YYZ you aren’t even on stand/gate 20 minutes after landing.

INFINITI329 wrote:

LGA is definitely the prize. As far as LGA is concerned AC is the only one who could operate this route tomorrow. Both PD and WS would have to acquire slots on either end. No American carrier that operates NYC-Toronto has turboprop in their fleet for a YTZ operation. So this route in theory would be Canadaian dominated.

Good news for Matilda.

chunhimlai wrote:

I think YTZ is too small to build preclearance facilities

Good point. I haven't been to YTZ but I've read there's a pedestrian tunnel from Eireann Quay on the 'mainland'. Could you somehow build the pre-clearance at the entrance to the tunnel?

2eng2efficient wrote:

Who wants to fly MSP/RDU/ATL-YTZ on a Q400? I guess being able to skip U.S. immigration is the consolation for having your skull rattled for 2+ hours. That, and free beer.

I don’t think Horizon will be the airline clamoring for these flights.

n9801f wrote:

chunhimlai wrote:

I think YTZ is too small to build preclearance facilities

Good point. I haven't been to YTZ but I've read there's a pedestrian tunnel from Eireann Quay on the 'mainland'. Could you somehow build the pre-clearance at the entrance to the tunnel?

YTZ has had “dead” space set aside for preclearance facilities for years. Construction logistics are not an issue. Page 28 of the 2018 master plan shows the space.

Cubsrule wrote:

n9801f wrote:

chunhimlai wrote:

I think YTZ is too small to build preclearance facilities

Good point. I haven't been to YTZ but I've read there's a pedestrian tunnel from Eireann Quay on the 'mainland'. Could you somehow build the pre-clearance at the entrance to the tunnel?

YTZ has had “dead” space set aside for preclearance facilities for years. Construction logistics are not an issue. Page 28 of the 2018 master plan shows the space.

Helpful.

Thank you.

INFINITI329 wrote:

LGA is definitely the prize. As far as LGA is concerned AC is the only one who could operate this route tomorrow. Both PD and WS would have to acquire slots on either end. No American carrier that operates NYC-Toronto has turboprop in their fleet for a YTZ operation. So this route in theory would be Canadaian dominated.

WS could start YTZ-LGA as soon as pre-clearance is up and running if they wanted to too. They have LGA slots and the right equipment to operate into YTZ. I doubt they will though given they only have 8 LGA slot pairs.

Dominion301 wrote:

INFINITI329 wrote:

LGA is definitely the prize. As far as LGA is concerned AC is the only one who could operate this route tomorrow. Both PD and WS would have to acquire slots on either end. No American carrier that operates NYC-Toronto has turboprop in their fleet for a YTZ operation. So this route in theory would be Canadaian dominated.

WS could start YTZ-LGA as soon as pre-clearance is up and running if they wanted to too. They have LGA slots and the right equipment to operate into YTZ. I doubt they will though given they only have 8 LGA slot pairs.

WS still needs to acquire slots at YTZ. PD has to acquire slots at LGA. AC is the only carrier that holds slots at both.

INFINITI329 wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

INFINITI329 wrote:

LGA is definitely the prize. As far as LGA is concerned AC is the only one who could operate this route tomorrow. Both PD and WS would have to acquire slots on either end. No American carrier that operates NYC-Toronto has turboprop in their fleet for a YTZ operation. So this route in theory would be Canadaian dominated.

WS could start YTZ-LGA as soon as pre-clearance is up and running if they wanted to too. They have LGA slots and the right equipment to operate into YTZ. I doubt they will though given they only have 8 LGA slot pairs.

WS still needs to acquire slots at YTZ. PD has to acquire slots at LGA. AC is the only carrier that holds slots at both.

True that although it seems as if PD have relenquished slots at YTZ, which would be up for grabs.

Dominion301 wrote:

True that although it seems as if PD have relenquished slots at YTZ, which would be up for grabs.

I was unable to find any information that PD has given up any slots at YTZ.

INFINITI329 wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

True that although it seems as if PD have relenquished slots at YTZ, which would be up for grabs.

I was unable to find any information that PD has given up any slots at YTZ.

If they have it's done out there, but when they weren't operating, it was publicly made available that PD wanted to relinquish some YTZ slots. I guess we'll know by next spring as AC have said they plan to increase YOW-YTZ to 8x daily. That either means they're cutting YUL-YTZ to 7x daily or they've acquired more YTZ slots.

Will there be a daily slot increase for YTZ?

It is key to note here that this is a hypothetical situation reported on by the Star, Sun and Globe & Mail. It is the same recycled news story since 2010. In 2010, City Centre was to have preclearance by 2013. In 2015 Canada and the United States signed the "Agreement on Land, Rail, Marine, and Air Transport Preclearance" -- to date, *NOTHING* has moved on the Island Airport with regard to USCBP preclearance operations.

StarAC17 wrote:

jjbiv wrote:

Interesting that most of the cities they are targeting for new service have FIS facilities. Only LGA would be a new destination without a FIS currently. Maybe their clientele prefers pre-clearance but as a US citizen I find it to be a pain since it means arriving at the airport earlier.

As said pre-clearance is much more efficient that immigration at US airports and US carriers can have Canadian flights with domestic gates also AC can be in the same terminal as UA and WS with DL.

My only experience is YYZ for pre-clearance and for US immigration at US airports I have been through LAX, SFO and BOS and SFO the latter took over an hour. This is because of some Asian flights landing around the same time my flight from SYD landed. This was back in 2012

IIRC Porter does serve IAD (or they did). They would probably start serving DCA from YTZ when this arrives provided there are slots available.

As a Canadian expat living in Tampa, I don't agree for all circumstances. For certain US destination airports which typically do not provide hub services, such as SAN, LAS, FLL, TPA or MCO, pre-clearance provides little benefit and might actually be worse. As an example on my last flight YYZ - TPA, I needed two hours to work through the border line at YYZ and it is not a fun expereince. Last week I flew BA LGW-TPA. It took 20 minutes to clear at TPA.

Pre-clearance should best be used on flights used for connecting through US hubs.There is little political (i.e. US voters) pressure to staff Canadian preclearance adequately so as to ensure quick passage for predominately Canadian passengers at Canadian airports. Also, why should Canadian taxpayers have to pay for the real estate to ease a US border requirement for other than speeding up the processing through US hubs.

That said, Porter wants preclear to enhance their connection relationship with JetBlue and other potential partners and that makes sense.

I think Porter should pay for the pre-clearance not me as a taxpayer.

yyztpa2 wrote:

Also, why should Canadian taxpayers have to pay for the real estate to ease a US border requirement for other than speeding up the processing through US hubs.

That said, Porter wants preclear to enhance their connection relationship with JetBlue and other potential partners and that makes sense.

Skywatcher wrote:

I think Porter should pay for the pre-clearance not me as a taxpayer.

As was observed up-thread, Canadian airports are privatized. Canadian taxpayers don't pay for preclearance - passengers do through airport fees.