DUBLIN
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dublin Airport to investigate oil spill
Dublin Airport to investigate oil spill
http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0612/dublinairport.html
12 June 2006 23:28
Dublin Airport is to investigate how a fuel tanker carrying up to 40,000 litres of aviation fuel overturned at the airport today.
Several hundred litres of the fuel spilled when the Exxon Mobil tanker overturned on the apron at the airport this morning.
A spokesperson for the airport said that a rescue team was sent immediately to remove the driver from the tanker.
The tanker has been uprighted and fuel cleared up. There was no disruption to flights and no one was hurt in the incident.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0612/dublinairport.html
12 June 2006 23:28
Dublin Airport is to investigate how a fuel tanker carrying up to 40,000 litres of aviation fuel overturned at the airport today.
Several hundred litres of the fuel spilled when the Exxon Mobil tanker overturned on the apron at the airport this morning.
A spokesperson for the airport said that a rescue team was sent immediately to remove the driver from the tanker.
The tanker has been uprighted and fuel cleared up. There was no disruption to flights and no one was hurt in the incident.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Age: 40
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flew in the other evening from MUC,on EI357, actually arrived 30mins ahead of schedule, didnt get too excited however regarding a speedy exit from the hellhole that is Dublin Airport and was expecting the usual 40minute wait at baggage reclaim. I was truly amazed when i reached the carosel to find my luggage waiting for my all within 5mins of stepping off the aircraft. Could it be that things are looking up?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: A Paddy in Paris
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the last three years, I don't think I've ever waitied more than 15 mins at the carousel for the luggage. To be honest, apart from the long walk from the A side to the baggage hall (usually the far side of it, oddly enough), disembarking is usually pretty painless at Dublin.
While the arrivals are mostly easy, my blood pressure always rises a little having to fight my way through 100-odd RYR passengers fighting to get to the top of their boarding queue. IMO, there is simply not enough space to comfortably handle the number of passengers coming and going through the same space in the A-side extension. More passport desks would be nice too.
While the arrivals are mostly easy, my blood pressure always rises a little having to fight my way through 100-odd RYR passengers fighting to get to the top of their boarding queue. IMO, there is simply not enough space to comfortably handle the number of passengers coming and going through the same space in the A-side extension. More passport desks would be nice too.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Dublin
Age: 39
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with the posts above. Coming back from Madrid last week and the bags were already on the belt when we had walked down from the B gates. Landed at 2103, taxied in, baggage claimed and outside the airport by 2125 from an Aer Lingus flight. On the other hand going in to Madrid there was a huge walk from the plane and it ws 55 minutes later before the bags arrived. While the airport is crowded and the queues can be bad, in my opinion it's not as bad as some people make out.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Ashbourne Co Meath Ireland
Age: 73
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends on who the handling agent is, the time of day, and a host of other factors that are sometimes outside the control of the airline. Aer Lingus are usually pretty good, Ryanair are OK if they are on time, so the crew is available, and anyone handled by Servisair can be in for a long wait unless they are lucky. No experience of Aviance or Sky handling.
What would help immensely would be if DAA would get their act together and sort out things like access to the baggage halls, among other things.
Then of course there's things like the new A pier extension. Disaster if you are due to depart before 0645, as there's no facilities out there whatsover before 0600, even though some of the flights leave at 0600.
Last weekend, we got lucky, in that we arrived just as the C pier end security gates were opening, so were able to get "airside" in under 10 minutes at 0500, for an 0630 flight. The person next to us on the aircraft wasn't as lucky, he arrived at 0520, and got to the boarding gate at 0620 for an 0630 departure, we eventually pushed at 0650, and quite a few people boarded after 0630, some in a clearly visible state of distress, and it was clear they'd not had time to replace trouser belts etc after the security check, and it's a LONG way to gates A64 - A71, if there's any flights going from the "old" A pier gates that are on the ground floor of the original terminal building, getting past that rugby scrum can be difficult, or almost impossible if it's a 757 boarding from the gate at the bottom of the short escalator!!!!
And then there's the problem of the missing marquee. I do wonder what would happen if a fire inspector called out to the airport at peak time on a Saturday morning, I suspect that he might well seriously consider closing the entire operation due to overcrowding, the thought of trying to do an emergency evacuation of the check in area at peak periods is scary!!!
All in all, while the airlines do the best they can, what's not changing with any degree of urgency is the over complacent laid back attitude of too many of the people that are in comfortable pension for life posts with DAA, and no reason at all to exert themselves as they are secure from any contact with reality. I don't see that changing until DAA is removed from being a semi state company, and even then, it will take years to get the civil service mentality out of the operation, it's so deeply ingrained now that breaking the mould will be almost impossible.
What would help immensely would be if DAA would get their act together and sort out things like access to the baggage halls, among other things.
Then of course there's things like the new A pier extension. Disaster if you are due to depart before 0645, as there's no facilities out there whatsover before 0600, even though some of the flights leave at 0600.
Last weekend, we got lucky, in that we arrived just as the C pier end security gates were opening, so were able to get "airside" in under 10 minutes at 0500, for an 0630 flight. The person next to us on the aircraft wasn't as lucky, he arrived at 0520, and got to the boarding gate at 0620 for an 0630 departure, we eventually pushed at 0650, and quite a few people boarded after 0630, some in a clearly visible state of distress, and it was clear they'd not had time to replace trouser belts etc after the security check, and it's a LONG way to gates A64 - A71, if there's any flights going from the "old" A pier gates that are on the ground floor of the original terminal building, getting past that rugby scrum can be difficult, or almost impossible if it's a 757 boarding from the gate at the bottom of the short escalator!!!!
And then there's the problem of the missing marquee. I do wonder what would happen if a fire inspector called out to the airport at peak time on a Saturday morning, I suspect that he might well seriously consider closing the entire operation due to overcrowding, the thought of trying to do an emergency evacuation of the check in area at peak periods is scary!!!
All in all, while the airlines do the best they can, what's not changing with any degree of urgency is the over complacent laid back attitude of too many of the people that are in comfortable pension for life posts with DAA, and no reason at all to exert themselves as they are secure from any contact with reality. I don't see that changing until DAA is removed from being a semi state company, and even then, it will take years to get the civil service mentality out of the operation, it's so deeply ingrained now that breaking the mould will be almost impossible.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With EI launching the new Dub-Newcastle, would it not make sense to allow passengers to be able to book Newcastle-Dubai, as the dubai flight doesnt leave until after 5, and the Newcastle-Dublin gets in at 4? I think EI should try and push UK-USA traffic through Dub, as EDI, BHX, and BRS all lack links to Chicago, Boston and LAX, and Manchester lacks flights to LAX. Most people dont like having to transit through LHR, and DUB has US immigration pre-clearance!
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point, JohnRizzo2000. I think, over the last 15-20 years, that the biggest single tragedy for DUB was the opportunities that have been (and continue to be) turned away - and this is one of them. Leaving aside US pre-inspection, which is a great idea and one of the advantages of flying out of DUB to the US, the possibility of having a hub at DUB always existed, had the political will been there to allow it. Remember, this was not the UK govt, the US govt or any US or UK airline that scuppered this opportunity; the scuppering, as so often the case in Irish aviation, was done by our own govt.
DUB would be a superb hub for regional UK destinations, from ABZ and GLA, down to places like BHX and BRS and EI could have done well out of it ... but no, the Shannon stopover lobby played the dog in the manger act and successive govts didn't have the backbone, the interest or the vision to tell them to get stuffed. It didn't matter what Shannon had or even what it needed, as long as it got more than DUB, no matter how different a market it was. It has been an immense squandering of resources and potential.
Unfortunately, you can see clearly the evidence of this lack of interest and general "washing of hands" ... in three key areas, DUB poses obstacles to growth - passenger terminal facilities, freight facilities and runway length, yet of course, the answer is "it's the DAA's airport, for them to do as they wish; not our problem, mate."
DUB would be a superb hub for regional UK destinations, from ABZ and GLA, down to places like BHX and BRS and EI could have done well out of it ... but no, the Shannon stopover lobby played the dog in the manger act and successive govts didn't have the backbone, the interest or the vision to tell them to get stuffed. It didn't matter what Shannon had or even what it needed, as long as it got more than DUB, no matter how different a market it was. It has been an immense squandering of resources and potential.
Unfortunately, you can see clearly the evidence of this lack of interest and general "washing of hands" ... in three key areas, DUB poses obstacles to growth - passenger terminal facilities, freight facilities and runway length, yet of course, the answer is "it's the DAA's airport, for them to do as they wish; not our problem, mate."
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With EI's future expansion to North America, I hope Mr. Mannion will see the opportunity EI has to feed traffic from across the UK through Dublin. Having worked with EK, who have such a strong hub at Dubai, maybe he will realise that he can develop a small hub at Dublin. That all said, if passengers have to fly Glasgow-Dublin-Shannon-Boston, it will never work!!!!
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 50
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If SNN had had a bunch of commuter a/c stationed there operating to IOM/BFS/LDY/UK west coast maybe UK feed would have been better - but it would have needed real hard selling on the part of EI in those UK ports. It would have taken someone of O'Ceidigh's chutzpah to pull it off.
As it is you could now have Malev feeding traffic to American through DUB and EI getting none of it because of their exit of Oneworld.
As it is you could now have Malev feeding traffic to American through DUB and EI getting none of it because of their exit of Oneworld.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dublin connections
EI also serves BUD, so if the schedules work, they could also get
that business.
I guess the thing EI needs to do is to work out which are the most
lucrative points of origin in terms of transit traffic (and indeed,
which have most potential). I think there's little point in trying to
get transit traffic westbound from busy airports like FRA, MAD, LHR, but
from less well served places like NCL, BRU, BUD etc, they could have some
success - if they have the timings right.
Probably because WW was no fan of transit traffic, the schedules have
not been arranged in such a way as to maximise this; if you go to a
place like AMS, or (best of all) VIE, for example, the schedules have
been worked with connections in mind.
The t/a schedules need also to be rejigged a little to maximise the
feed, BUT of course, if they feel that there's sufficient traffic from
DUB itself, why bother?
that business.
I guess the thing EI needs to do is to work out which are the most
lucrative points of origin in terms of transit traffic (and indeed,
which have most potential). I think there's little point in trying to
get transit traffic westbound from busy airports like FRA, MAD, LHR, but
from less well served places like NCL, BRU, BUD etc, they could have some
success - if they have the timings right.
Probably because WW was no fan of transit traffic, the schedules have
not been arranged in such a way as to maximise this; if you go to a
place like AMS, or (best of all) VIE, for example, the schedules have
been worked with connections in mind.
The t/a schedules need also to be rejigged a little to maximise the
feed, BUT of course, if they feel that there's sufficient traffic from
DUB itself, why bother?
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Ashbourne Co Meath Ireland
Age: 73
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, let's dream a little
No harm, who know, it could work.
Let's suppose for a moment that EI could do a really good deal with Airbus on some 380's, and that Dublin could get it's act together to be able to handle them ( Fat chance, but this is a dream remember).
Given the flight time to the East coast of the US, there would be the potential for a 380 to do 1.5 rotations a day, so 2 of them could provide 3 flights a day each way to the East coast, a flight every 8 hours. Given appropriate feeder flights from the right places, and appropriate pricing, and the advantage of pre clearance at DUB, properly marketed, that should in theory be quite a nice little earner, as anywhere further east will make the flight times just a little too long for that schedule to be comfortable.
OK, it's going to put the airframes under a bit of pressure, and the infrastructure at DUB has no hope at the moment, but it could be made to work. If freight could also be interlined, I would suspect that the load factor could be very good, as that length of route should allow a good load of pax and freight to be carried.
Only a dream, but it has to be worth a little bit of thought.
Let's suppose for a moment that EI could do a really good deal with Airbus on some 380's, and that Dublin could get it's act together to be able to handle them ( Fat chance, but this is a dream remember).
Given the flight time to the East coast of the US, there would be the potential for a 380 to do 1.5 rotations a day, so 2 of them could provide 3 flights a day each way to the East coast, a flight every 8 hours. Given appropriate feeder flights from the right places, and appropriate pricing, and the advantage of pre clearance at DUB, properly marketed, that should in theory be quite a nice little earner, as anywhere further east will make the flight times just a little too long for that schedule to be comfortable.
OK, it's going to put the airframes under a bit of pressure, and the infrastructure at DUB has no hope at the moment, but it could be made to work. If freight could also be interlined, I would suspect that the load factor could be very good, as that length of route should allow a good load of pax and freight to be carried.
Only a dream, but it has to be worth a little bit of thought.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Theres definately potential for EI to develop some sort of hub at dublin. They could easily feed traffic from BOS, ORD, JFK and LAX to the UK, Spain, South of France etc. EI offers very good fares from DUB to the US and to Europe, so they would be a viable alternative for many travellers over BA, AF etc. If they just timed their flights a little better! If they could get their ORD flight into DUB earlier, they could connect passengers onto some of the many flights leaving from 6.30am onwards!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Leeds, UK & Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good idea, wrong airport
Personally I have always thought that EI could make SNN into a fortres hub. I do not have any loyalty to SNN, in fact I think that the place is a bog, a hole and a pain in the ass, but the point is that its an EMPTY pain in the ass.
Shannon has more terminal capacity and runway space than it could ever use, and the runways are definately long enough for the A380(if we are continueing the dream). The pre clearence is also a major advantage, and should be marketed far more. Perhaps it would not be a runnner to base a set of 320s at SNN but they could just do morning patterns for feed.
Personally I dont think that DUB could ever be an effecient hub for any one, its too compromised, I honestly think that the DUB is byond repair, and serious consideration shoudl be given to starting all over again on a green field site, for capacity of 50 million pax per anum. What they are proposing at the moment is only going to make the mess a whole lot worse.
Shannon has more terminal capacity and runway space than it could ever use, and the runways are definately long enough for the A380(if we are continueing the dream). The pre clearence is also a major advantage, and should be marketed far more. Perhaps it would not be a runnner to base a set of 320s at SNN but they could just do morning patterns for feed.
Personally I dont think that DUB could ever be an effecient hub for any one, its too compromised, I honestly think that the DUB is byond repair, and serious consideration shoudl be given to starting all over again on a green field site, for capacity of 50 million pax per anum. What they are proposing at the moment is only going to make the mess a whole lot worse.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Baile Átha Cliath, Éire
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there's no need to start all over again on a green field site when the land is there and bought. a new terminal should be built on the purchased land west of the current terminal, operations transferred there. Now level the old terminal buildings and start rebuilding with a decent infrastructure all the while capacity is maintained to a reasonable extent. imagine the airport charges though with all that...hah!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shannon could never be a hub becasue hubs need O&D traffic. Dublins new terminal should be built near the SR technics buildings! Building a new terminal at the edge of the airport, next to a road is pointless as it allows no expansion!!!! Come on DAA! Wake up!
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The area near the SR Technics hangar (I presume you mean the old EI hangars) wouldn't suit as the location for a pax terminal as there's very little room for outward expansion, due to the proximity to the new 28R runway. It might possibly work as the location for a freight terminal, however. I think that if the DAA was told to either use that area, or the 50 acre site it's just bought, west of 16/34, for freight terminals, it might make better use of the current parking areas for pax traffic.
The prospect of levelling the whole of the current pax terminal and starting with a green field site, just doesn't work. There needs to be a terminal and what is there now, as unsatisfactory as it may be in many ways, has to be worked with. However, in view of the fact that T2 won't be able to accommodate traffic requirements for much beyond its opening, the time to start planning the next phase of development is now.
The area between what will be the two main runways will be that site; the main terminal building, as I see it, will be close to the threshhold of 10L/R and the new facility will be designed with growth in mind, with satellites to be added as growth demands. With good planning (which means keeping the DAA as far away from it as possible), that terminal complex should be able to accommodate growth for the next 20+ years.
The prospect of levelling the whole of the current pax terminal and starting with a green field site, just doesn't work. There needs to be a terminal and what is there now, as unsatisfactory as it may be in many ways, has to be worked with. However, in view of the fact that T2 won't be able to accommodate traffic requirements for much beyond its opening, the time to start planning the next phase of development is now.
The area between what will be the two main runways will be that site; the main terminal building, as I see it, will be close to the threshhold of 10L/R and the new facility will be designed with growth in mind, with satellites to be added as growth demands. With good planning (which means keeping the DAA as far away from it as possible), that terminal complex should be able to accommodate growth for the next 20+ years.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on guys, let's be realistic here; let's focus on what can actually be done. We need an airport. We need the capacity that's there already, as insufficient and ill-planned as it may be.
It wouldn't surprise me if the chief engineer didn't know what he was doing, but that may not be his fault, if the company itself doesn't know. We heard - how many months ago now, two or three? - that the planned new terminal was too small, because the DAA hadn't been aware of growth plans of the two major carriers* (we'll get to that one later). So what's happened since? Zip, nada, rien ...
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the DAA needs to be removed from day to day running of passenger terminals and marketing and be confined to airfield management (i.e. the regulatory side of running an airport). Then, bring in the likes of Schiphol, SATS (Singapore) - people with worldwide experience of operating top class airports, with both low cost and full service operations side by side, not to mention cargo facilities too.
One of the key problems, I think, is that we run up against capacity walls which simply don't exist at most other airports. OK, LHR and FRA are slot restricted, but with most other airports, if the demand arises for new cargo or long haul pax routes, you can bring those onstream, because the airport is equipped to handle them: Dublin isn't. And tragically - due to a fatal combination of ineptitude on the part of the operator and poor oversight (through lack of interest) on the part of the govt, there's absolutely no clear willingness to tackle the issue. Only today, there was a report expressing serious concern about exports (which are declining, but no one in govt has yet noticed the link between the lack of investment in cargo facilities at the country's main airport and the issue of exports; don't govt departments talk to each other?)
(*It struck me that the DAA's excuse, that it didn't take account of the growth ambitions of the two Irish carriers, was a red herring. It's extremely unlikely, I think, that FR would want to operate from T2, as this would mean splitting its operation between piers at opposite ends of the passenger terminal complex; that would only add cost and inefficiency and I just can't see FR doing that.)
It wouldn't surprise me if the chief engineer didn't know what he was doing, but that may not be his fault, if the company itself doesn't know. We heard - how many months ago now, two or three? - that the planned new terminal was too small, because the DAA hadn't been aware of growth plans of the two major carriers* (we'll get to that one later). So what's happened since? Zip, nada, rien ...
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the DAA needs to be removed from day to day running of passenger terminals and marketing and be confined to airfield management (i.e. the regulatory side of running an airport). Then, bring in the likes of Schiphol, SATS (Singapore) - people with worldwide experience of operating top class airports, with both low cost and full service operations side by side, not to mention cargo facilities too.
One of the key problems, I think, is that we run up against capacity walls which simply don't exist at most other airports. OK, LHR and FRA are slot restricted, but with most other airports, if the demand arises for new cargo or long haul pax routes, you can bring those onstream, because the airport is equipped to handle them: Dublin isn't. And tragically - due to a fatal combination of ineptitude on the part of the operator and poor oversight (through lack of interest) on the part of the govt, there's absolutely no clear willingness to tackle the issue. Only today, there was a report expressing serious concern about exports (which are declining, but no one in govt has yet noticed the link between the lack of investment in cargo facilities at the country's main airport and the issue of exports; don't govt departments talk to each other?)
(*It struck me that the DAA's excuse, that it didn't take account of the growth ambitions of the two Irish carriers, was a red herring. It's extremely unlikely, I think, that FR would want to operate from T2, as this would mean splitting its operation between piers at opposite ends of the passenger terminal complex; that would only add cost and inefficiency and I just can't see FR doing that.)