Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quoting Beatyair (Reply 2): Look at how well London City and Laguardia are with how close these airports are to the business districts |
Quoting YYZFAN (Reply 1): The Liberals aren't risking Toronto, and the island is a surprisingly strong lobby |
Quoting N1120A (Reply 3): Thatcher decided to develop a major business district around the airport |
Quoting N1120A (Reply 3): Heathrow has onerous slot exemptions. |
Quoting N1120A (Reply 3): LGA exists solely because New Yorkers don't get how detrimental it is to their regional air transport system. |
Quoting Beatyair (Reply 2): The only thing I can't figure out is that why extend both ends of the runway, just extend the west. |
Quoting YYZFAN (Reply 1): Unfortunately, this is barely news. The Liberals aren't risking Toronto, and the island is a surprisingly strong lobby. Another blow to the CSeries program, as this could have been a good size order. |
Quoting rampbro (Reply 5): I'm trying to find ways to understand this decision as a product of the citizen lobby, but it's all but impossible. My money is going towards pressure from other, more established aviation interests. |
Quoting rampbro (Reply 5): I'm trying to find ways to understand this decision as a product of the citizen lobby |
Quoting drgmobile (Reply 9): I don't understand what this even means. "Risking Toronto." Are you suggesting public opinion in the city is against the airport expansion? If so, do you have data to support this? |
Quoting drgmobile (Reply 9): Also, "the island is a surprisingly strong lobby." The island is a mound of dirt that rises out of the Lake. Who are you referring to? The anti-jet lobby? |
Quoting YTZ (Reply 10): This is probably the end of Porter too. |
Quoting YYZFAN (Reply 11): Many downtown councillors have advocated against commercial air service, let alone jets. It's an issue they have used to rally support, and the NIMBY vote is strong on the island and in the core. |
Quoting YYZFAN (Reply 11): The citizens that live on that island are a fairly strong lobby considering they live on the lake. The ani-jet lobby has strong support and foundation from the island. |
Quoting rampbro (Reply 12): I doubt that very much. It may mean the end of growth at Porter, but I don't think they shutter the airline because their growth strategy didn't pan out. |
Quoting rampbro (Reply 12): Sure, but activism and citizen support does not a decision make. |
Quoting planemaker (Reply 14): can go out to Pearson for their longer haul flights with a negligible time difference. |
Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 15): Not in my book - I visited Toronto as a tourist in 2012 without a car and my semi-downtown accommodation was 20 minutes from YTZ but easily 1.5 hours from YYZ via public transport! |
Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 13): Absolutely agree. These sorts of agreements should be made around the dBA of planes, not the engine type |
Quoting YYZAMS (Reply 16): The island airport has been there before a lot of those high rises and those buying and living on the island all knew and know about the island. |
Quoting YYZAMS (Reply 16): The continued argument of NOJETS TO and other uninformed people say is "just fly out of YYZ with the CSeries" but they fail to realize that YYZ is the top 5 most expensive landing fees in the world. If it were that easy they would. |
Quoting YYZAMS (Reply 16): It is sad that Toronto is destined to become one of the top financial cities in the world but too afraid to expand and support Canadian industries. I don't think this is over just yet....only put on hold. THere are many ways around it. |
Quoting YYZFAN (Reply 11): (the loudest being Adam Vaughan) |
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 21): ...and it's looking like he won't be getting a cabinet post, as was previously thought, so he probably won't have as much pull with Trudeau Jr, as he thought. |
Quote: Nine Toronto Liberal MPs — including Adam Vaughan, Carolyn Bennett and Chrystia Freeland — informed city council of the party's position in a June 4 letter. "The Liberal Party's policies on the waterfront are as clear as they are forward looking," the letter said. |
Quoting planemaker (Reply 17): That was then. Now there is 25 minute public transit from Pearson to Union Station. |
Quoting planemaker (Reply 17): That was then. Now there is 25 minute public transit from Pearson to Union Station. |
Quoting cloudboy (Reply 23): Second, the reality is that Porter's success really relied on its potential for growth, not its current performance. |
Quoting cloudboy (Reply 23): Air Canada will now never see Porter as a real threat |
Quoting YTZ" class="quote" target="_blank">YTZ (Reply 24): The price of the Union Pearson Express and the travel time does not outweigh the convenience of YTZ though. Especially with the new tunnel. |
Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 25): I just don't see this as dead in the water yet and certainly believe that there are legs to this which could push it through the courts. |
Quoting planemaker (Reply 27): There is no basis for any legal action. |
Quoting EnviroTO (Reply 20): Toronto will survive with or without 90 seat prop planes landing on the waterfront. |
Quoting cloudboy (Reply 23): Air Canada will now never see Porter as a real threat, and as a result prices are going to go up. Toronto is already too expensive to get to, and there is no further incentive for prices to come down. |
Quoting cloudboy (Reply 23): It will be a while before the effects begin to be seen, and probably more before all the excuses are seen through. But that only hurts Toronto all the more, as it will be a while before they look to fix the situation. Which is too bad since Toronto was just beginning to pop up on the American tourist and small business radar. |
Quoting rampbro (Reply 5): And Pearson has onerous landing fees. |
Quoting rampbro (Reply 5): This is a shame. I think there's a bigger play going on here with Bombardier, and my suspicion is that it involves rail travel as opposed to air travel. |
Quoting yowza (Reply 6): 'm fuzzy on the details but if memory serves, the extension required something like 400 meters. If that was all built on the west side that would all but close up access to two yacht clubs and would take the runway right to the foot of Ontario Place. Less than ideal to say the least. There must be a way to get this to work but there are too many cooks in the kitchen. |
Quoting drgmobile (Reply 9): I don't understand what this even means. "Risking Toronto." Are you suggesting public opinion in the city is against the airport expansion? If so, do you have data to support this? |
Quoting drgmobile (Reply 9): Also, "the island is a surprisingly strong lobby." The island is a mound of dirt that rises out of the Lake. Who are you referring to? The anti-jet lobby? Ports Toronto is a proponent of the change. |
Quoting YTZ (Reply 10): And ironically, avoiding expansion means bulldozing pristine farmland in Pickering to build a new airport there..... |
Quoting Thomaas (Reply 18): With the new Union-Pearson Express, YYZ is the most accessible its ever been. |
Quoting brilondon (Reply 30): YYZ has plenty of expansion opportunities and don't think that it would compete with an airport in Pickering because the government would have to approve of the said changes and they won't. |
Quoting brilondon (Reply 30): The Airport in Pickering is not going to happen in the next 50 years. |
Quoting YTZ (Reply 29): What does that do to Toronto's position as a regional economic hub if the price of connectivity skyrockets? |
Quoting brilondon (Reply 30): The residents of the condos in the harbour area are very affluent and have a lot of political power not only locally but provincially and federally as well. There is no way it is ever going to happen. |
Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 28): in Canada it appears almost anything can be pushed through the courts...I stand by the statement, |
Quoting planemaker (Reply 33): Skyrocket? Like what? Because no PD jets fares are going to go up 500%... 1000%? |
Quoting planemaker (Reply 33): With the Liberal government, and specifically Toronto MPs, stating categorically that there will be no jets at the island, it is quite funny that people are still insisting the opposite. |
Quoting YTZ (Reply 34): I forget the exact amount. But I believe TC data had shown fares down 20-30% because of the PD as the third player. |
Quoting YTZ (Reply 34): I am saying PD disappearing, which is a distinct possibility if they can't expand, might reverse these recent savings. |
Quoting planemaker (Reply 22): The expansion is DOA. |
Quoting YTZ (Reply 34): Quoting planemaker (Reply 33): With the Liberal government, and specifically Toronto MPs, stating categorically that there will be no jets at the island, it is quite funny that people are still insisting the opposite. Agree with this. There's no way a government will overrule several of its MPs in a vote and finance rich area. If it were just Adam Vaughan, it might have gone the other way. |
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 37): This has not changed. |
Quoting planemaker (Reply 35): I don't see PD "disappearing", but some significant re-structuring is a distinct possibility. |
Quoting YTZ" class="quote" target="_blank">YTZ (Reply 38): Quoting yyz717 (Reply 37): This has not changed. Sadly, I'd concede that politics matter more than facts. It's not just Adam Vaughan that decided to sign his name on to a letter to the mayor saying there will be no discussion on the tripartite. It is what it is. It'll be interesting to see how the government navigates the potential of job losses with this pledge not to expand the airport though. Perhaps more federal aid? |
Quoting Polot (Reply 39): at the end of the day PD needs to open up another hub at a less physically constrained airport if it ever wants to be more than a minor bit player. |
Quoting Polot (Reply 39): |
Quoting YTZ" class="quote" target="_blank">YTZ (Reply 41): An excellent point. But it's a bit chicken and egg. The jets would have allowed them to at least grow profitability before building another hub. But of course, if they don't open another, they are going to have a tough time growing profitability. |
Quote: Porter Airlines has been pushing for the approval of jets, but city council deferred any decision on the eve of the 2014 municipal election. Instead, PortsToronto has embarked on a series of studies including a runway design and environmental assessment and says it still plans to complete the work. |
Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 44): what sectors are payload limited for the Q400 out of YTZ ? |
Quoting YTZ" class="quote" target="_blank">YTZ (Reply 46): YTZ-YHZ for one |
Quoting rampbro (Reply 5): ....which already exists in Toronto, very close to the airport. |
Quoting rampbro (Reply 5): I think it's that plus what are you gonna do with 30 million pax/year in the 3-4 years it will take to build a new airport or expand an existing one. |
Quoting cloudboy (Reply 23): Number one Toronto is never going to grow it's tourism sector when it is so hard and expensive to get there |
Quoting brilondon (Reply 30): They have been reduced in recent years to make it more competitive. YYZ was losing a lot of traffic to the U.S. airports in BUF and DTW as well as people going to YUL and YOW for international flights. |
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 40): there is no indication that PD can gain anymore slots at YTZ. |
Quoting YTZ" class="quote" target="_blank">YTZ (Reply 46): Better tie up with B6.... |