DUBLIN - 2
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Ireland
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shannon Airport's initiative (for that's what this was) on acquiring a Pre-inspection facility was years in the planning and pre-dated Open Skies by a long way.
No airline or business jet is going to needlessly stop at Shannon just to avail of pre customs.
Infact has any airline actually used DUB T2 pre clearance as in poped in for the sole reason of pre clearing?
The main thing holding Dublin back from attracting enroute US traffic is that stubby little runway. If we got on with it and built 10L/28R to the expanded 3,600 meters asproposed then we could go after the 3 daily Jet Airways flights stopping in Brussels, Singapore stops in Frankfurt, EI could use their A350's properly and a Chinese carrier could launch a direct flight as they claimed they were so desperate to do when Gilmore was over there a few weeks ago.
10/28 would have been a proper runway if the Clare/Limerick TD's of the time hadn't got their knickers in a twist and demanded it be shortened when it was being planned. Why has cork got a shorter runway? To protect Shannon also. How much do you reckon UAL, DAL and AWE would prefer to be sending those daily 757s into Cork where there is actually a significant population? In short, Dublin and Cork airports have been hampered for decades to protect Shannon.
And before anybody accuses me of being a SNN basher, I work there
10/28 would have been a proper runway if the Clare/Limerick TD's of the time hadn't got their knickers in a twist and demanded it be shortened when it was being planned. Why has cork got a shorter runway? To protect Shannon also. How much do you reckon UAL, DAL and AWE would prefer to be sending those daily 757s into Cork where there is actually a significant population? In short, Dublin and Cork airports have been hampered for decades to protect Shannon.
And before anybody accuses me of being a SNN basher, I work there
Last edited by Una Due Tfc; 29th Aug 2013 at 19:06.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wait until SNN has blown the money given to them at the start of the year, won't take then long before it will blame DUB.
The above post is 100% right.
The above post is 100% right.
Last edited by EI-A330-300; 29th Aug 2013 at 19:21.
Why has cork got a shorter runway? To protect Shannon also.
Any danger that it might have something to do with where Cork is built and when. Its also built on a little hill => 502 Ft (AIP EICK 2.24-1 refers)
Lots of our Airports are in the wrong place.
They were also built with a different Aircraft in mind. The CTR's around Knock/Galway/Sligo/Waterford/Kerry & Donegal are designed with an older turbo prop or very small jet in mind. It was expected based on Aircraft systems at the time that all arrivals would route to the overhead then outbound for a procedural approach.
The main runway in Cork was extended in the 1980's where B737 300/400 were cutting edge and Aer Lingus still had BAC 111 in its fleet.
So maybe a little research is in order before posting.
Cork Airport's RWY length (or lack of it)situation is as a result of decisions taken 30+ years ago.
The financing of any RWY extension is now dependent on DAA funds.
And their priority will be Dublin.
Dublin will get its new RWY when it can afford to pay for it.
Remember the CAR has put a minimum passenger figure in place before it will sanction an increase in charges to pay for a new RWY.
Sadly for now the traffic levels in Ireland and the state of the country's finances will mean that any state support for such an extension is moot.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Ireland
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The financing of any RWY extension is now dependent on DAA funds.
But, as you say, the regulator has set a requirement that traffic at Dublin reaches a certain level (23 million passengers, I think?) before it would approve any increase in charges to fund the development.
Pity that the same logic wasn't applied to SNN.
Sadly for now the traffic levels in Ireland and the state of the country's finances will mean that any state support for such an extension is moot.
Last edited by GCUFD; 29th Aug 2013 at 20:50.
If you look back a few pages you will see a link to an Oreachtas report detailing how 10/28 in Dublin was originally planned to be 3,200m, same as Shannon, but TDs from the South West threatened to revolt and it was subsequently shortened. 10/28 in Dublin was deliberately made too short for a fully loaded 747 to use without needing a fuel stop. The hope was that this would make flights have to go to Shannon, in the end it did more favours for Manchester.
And yes Cork was built in a bloody stupid place, but put a nice long CATIII runway there and most of it's problems are sorted.
And yes Cork was built in a bloody stupid place, but put a nice long CATIII runway there and most of it's problems are sorted.
And yes Cork was built in a bloody stupid place, but put a nice long CATIII runway there and most of it's problems are sorted
There is no traffic justification for a nice long CAT III in Cork. Not now and probably not for another 100 years.
That kind of thinking is why we have an airport in nearly every county along the west coast.
And the capacity of the DAA to raise funds is reduced by it being left with SNN debts.
While all 3 were under the control of Aer Rianta cost of facilities was centralised.
No business case for the repayment of costs seems to have been done.
Only Dublin can cover its costs and pay for its own expansion.
Shannon/Cork will cover their costs but strategic expansion will not come from their coffers.
TDs from the South West threatened to revolt
Its time that this stops.
Cork Airport's RWY length (or lack of it)situation is as a result of decisions taken 30+ years ago.
The financing of any RWY extension is now dependent on DAA funds.
The financing of any RWY extension is now dependent on DAA funds.
Sadly for now the traffic levels in Ireland and the state of the country's finances will mean that any state support for such an extension is moot.
Dublin will eventually have a new RWY.
Cork will only be in a position to extend its RWY if the state picks up the tab.
Cork is still under the umbrella of the DAA until the issue of the debts associated with the new terminal are sorted.
On 11 April 2008, the board of Cork Airport Authority agreed by one vote to accept responsibility for a debt of 113 million incurred by the Dublin Airport Authority in the redevelopment of Cork Airport in order to secure independence from Dublin Airport
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Belfast, Ireland
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spending money on a new parallel runway in Dublin or a runway extension in Cork is an investment in national infrastructure. They are capital investments in Ireland and would be investments in the Irish economy.
These runway projects should be part of an investment stimulus in the coming budgets. There is no reason why DUB can`t become a more successful hub like AMS.
These runway projects should be part of an investment stimulus in the coming budgets. There is no reason why DUB can`t become a more successful hub like AMS.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Ireland
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spending money on a new parallel runway in Dublin or a runway extension in Cork is an investment in national infrastructure. They are capital investments in Ireland and would be investments in the Irish economy.
These runway projects should be part of an investment stimulus in the coming budgets. There is no reason why DUB can`t become a more successful hub like AMS.
These runway projects should be part of an investment stimulus in the coming budgets. There is no reason why DUB can`t become a more successful hub like AMS.
While in Cork's case, the possibility of State support isn't absolutely ruled out, EU rules would generally envisage any investment (other than a commercial investment) being limited to even smaller regional airports, such as Knock or Kerry. It would be hard to sustain a case for a State aid to Cork airport. You'd have to demonstrate that the area was social disadvantaged, and it just isn't.
To give a concrete example, SNN's special tax regime was struck out by the European Commission a few years ago on grounds that the Mid West wasn't especially socially disadvantaged. That's why any of the tax concessions now being framed for the aviation sector are available throughout Ireland. IDA, etc, can present the Shannon region as an area for an aviation services hub. But, if you want to do your aircraft leasing from Nenagh, or Nobber for that matter, there's nothing stopping you. All of the tax incentives are equally available in all other locations; DUB, ORK, wherever.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shannon needn't worry about Cork setting up an aviation services hub whatever about Nobber or Nenagh. It couldn't even accommodate an oil-rig related helicopter this Summer. The Chopper in question had to position to and from Waterford each day.
Last edited by ryan2000; 30th Aug 2013 at 23:40.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Clare
Age: 53
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just have to say that some of the posts are so stupid recently. Things like SNN being debt free etc. Aer Rianta International propped up DUB, ORK & SNN for years and was a SNN Company until taken away recently. Posters on this forum should state facts and not hearsay!!! Can the donkeys here who posted, post, how much on those outside DUB have paid in actual taxes to keep DUB going?
Airlines like Aer Lingus, United (SNN is more profitable that EWR- DUBl ), DL etc are making $ in SNN.
If SNN were to be given $1bn to waste of tax payers money like DUB were then I think SNN would make a go of it much better. T2 is a farce, paid by mostly people outside the DUB area. Typical uneducated design whereby if you need to go from A- B you much travel via X, Y & Z and that is without being a connecting passenger.
ORK and SNN have been burdened by DUB long enough so get over it. We propped up the Shamrock carrier for long enough so that it could fly the cronies out of DUB.
Airlines like Aer Lingus, United (SNN is more profitable that EWR- DUBl ), DL etc are making $ in SNN.
If SNN were to be given $1bn to waste of tax payers money like DUB were then I think SNN would make a go of it much better. T2 is a farce, paid by mostly people outside the DUB area. Typical uneducated design whereby if you need to go from A- B you much travel via X, Y & Z and that is without being a connecting passenger.
ORK and SNN have been burdened by DUB long enough so get over it. We propped up the Shamrock carrier for long enough so that it could fly the cronies out of DUB.
I just have to say that some of the posts are so stupid recently. Things like SNN being debt free etc. Aer Rianta International propped up DUB, ORK & SNN for years and was a SNN Company until taken away recently. Posters on this forum should state facts and not hearsay!!! Can the donkeys here who posted, post, how much on those outside DUB have paid in actual taxes to keep DUB going?
Airlines like Aer Lingus, United (SNN is more profitable that EWR- DUBl ), DL etc are making $ in SNN.
If SNN were to be given $1bn to waste of tax payers money like DUB were then I think SNN would make a go of it much better. T2 is a farce, paid by mostly people outside the DUB area. Typical uneducated design whereby if you need to go from A- B you much travel via X, Y & Z and that is without being a connecting passenger.
ORK and SNN have been burdened by DUB long enough so get over it. We propped up the Shamrock carrier for long enough so that it could fly the cronies out of DUB.
Airlines like Aer Lingus, United (SNN is more profitable that EWR- DUBl ), DL etc are making $ in SNN.
If SNN were to be given $1bn to waste of tax payers money like DUB were then I think SNN would make a go of it much better. T2 is a farce, paid by mostly people outside the DUB area. Typical uneducated design whereby if you need to go from A- B you much travel via X, Y & Z and that is without being a connecting passenger.
ORK and SNN have been burdened by DUB long enough so get over it. We propped up the Shamrock carrier for long enough so that it could fly the cronies out of DUB.
Dublin carried more Pax in March than SNN did in the whole of last year yet somehow you think that SNN is the jewel in the crown !!!!!
SNN would have been in substantial trouble over the last 10 years had not Dubya invaded Iraq as US forces transiting through there kept its numbers up and the sirport hid behind this claiming we are so successful.
SNN is a MINOR regional airport that used Politics to prevent other airports notably Dublin having direct routes to the US, net result was many Pax went to London rather than SNN. It was overstaffed and overmanned for years before winds of reality blew in.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Racedo - an excellent post.
Speaking of propping up airports, the DAA have being propping up SNN and ORK for a long time. That is a drain on the taxpayer, DUB is profitable and not loss making.
No point in taking about if and or but, the simple fact is Shannon will NEVER need 1 billion to expand. I would bet a larger terminal at the airport will NEVER be needed.
Its not ORK and SNN being burdened by DUB but the other way round.
DUB should be sold so there would be no political interference but the Government to keep SN and other airports happy. I only wish the EU/IMF told the Gov the state assets they had to sell and not left the choice up to them. If only they had to sell DUB, would be the best decision ever. At least ORK are paying their debit down.
As for United and Delta being very profitable from SNN, that's very easy when you operate B757's and Delta. What it does show is larger than B757 isn't profitable form SNN as we can see with EI dropping the A330 for B757.
DAA would only be delighted to get rid of ORK and SNN and they have with SNN, hopefully ORK will go in a few years.
Now if you want to talk about peoples taxes, then SNN catchment area is the highest or second highest unemployment rate in Ireland while Dublin is the lowest. It's more a case of use paying for people to fly from SNN. Anyway better leave the East/West tax issue before the Mods have something to say about it.
I just have to say that some of the posts are so stupid recently. Things like SNN being debt free etc. Aer Rianta International propped up DUB, ORK & SNN for years and was a SNN Company until taken away recently. Posters on this forum should state facts and not hearsay!!! Can the donkeys here who posted, post, how much on those outside DUB have paid in actual taxes to keep DUB going?
Airlines like Aer Lingus, United (SNN is more profitable that EWR- DUBl ), DL etc are making $ in SNN.
If SNN were to be given $1bn to waste of tax payers money like DUB were then I think SNN would make a go of it much better. T2 is a farce, paid by mostly people outside the DUB area. Typical uneducated design whereby if you need to go from A- B you much travel via X, Y & Z and that is without being a connecting passenger.
ORK and SNN have been burdened by DUB long enough so get over it. We propped up the Shamrock carrier for long enough so that it could fly the cronies out of DUB.
Airlines like Aer Lingus, United (SNN is more profitable that EWR- DUBl ), DL etc are making $ in SNN.
If SNN were to be given $1bn to waste of tax payers money like DUB were then I think SNN would make a go of it much better. T2 is a farce, paid by mostly people outside the DUB area. Typical uneducated design whereby if you need to go from A- B you much travel via X, Y & Z and that is without being a connecting passenger.
ORK and SNN have been burdened by DUB long enough so get over it. We propped up the Shamrock carrier for long enough so that it could fly the cronies out of DUB.
No point in taking about if and or but, the simple fact is Shannon will NEVER need 1 billion to expand. I would bet a larger terminal at the airport will NEVER be needed.
Its not ORK and SNN being burdened by DUB but the other way round.
DUB should be sold so there would be no political interference but the Government to keep SN and other airports happy. I only wish the EU/IMF told the Gov the state assets they had to sell and not left the choice up to them. If only they had to sell DUB, would be the best decision ever. At least ORK are paying their debit down.
As for United and Delta being very profitable from SNN, that's very easy when you operate B757's and Delta. What it does show is larger than B757 isn't profitable form SNN as we can see with EI dropping the A330 for B757.
DAA would only be delighted to get rid of ORK and SNN and they have with SNN, hopefully ORK will go in a few years.
Now if you want to talk about peoples taxes, then SNN catchment area is the highest or second highest unemployment rate in Ireland while Dublin is the lowest. It's more a case of use paying for people to fly from SNN. Anyway better leave the East/West tax issue before the Mods have something to say about it.
Last edited by EI-A330-300; 31st Aug 2013 at 11:47.
then SNN catchment area is the highest or second highest unemployment rate in Ireland
Border
Unemployment rate (%) 15.1 15.4 16.6 17.7 16.5 15.5 15.3
Midland
Unemployment rate (%) 17.4 18.7 18.3 17.4 16.9 17.1 15.4
West
Unemployment rate (%) 17.0 16.2 16.2 15.3 14.4 12.9 13.6
Mid-West
Unemployment rate (%) 16.0 16.0 16.1 16.6 15.4 15.6 14.8
Mid-West Clare, Limerick City, Limerick County North Tipperary
West Galway City, Galway county, Mayo, Roscommon.
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/rel...nhs_q22013.pdf
The term "catchment area" I have always found a moveable feast.
There are several maps out there each used to justify a particular airport so most need to be treated with a pinch of salt.
Shannon will NEVER need 1 billion to expand
the DAA have being propping up SNN and ORK for a long time
All funds into central coffers and all items funded centrally.
Expansion undertaken at the behest of the political masters.
Its not ORK and SNN being burdened by DUB but the other way round.
What it does show is larger than B757 isn't profitable form SNN as we can see with EI dropping the A330 for B757.
I understand that the A330 will again return for the busier summer season and B757 operate from Dublin during that time.
So is this not an appropriate use by AER LINGUS of its routes/assets?
While expanding its service from Shannon.
hopefully ORK will go in a few years
Anyway better leave the East/West tax issue before the Mods have something to say about it
There is however still a Border Region which is Galway, Mayo, Donegal, Sligo, Roscommon area which has special tax advantages.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The A330 will not be at SNN again. It's being used for DUB-SFO. SNN will be all B757 until the contract with air contractors is complete.
And if DL and UA were so profitable why have not increased capacity.
And if DL and UA were so profitable why have not increased capacity.
Last edited by EI-A330-300; 31st Aug 2013 at 13:40.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Ireland
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@bannercounty
If SNN were to be given $1bn to waste of tax payers money like DUB were then I think SNN would make a go of it much better. T2 is a farce, paid by mostly people outside the DUB area.
If SNN were to be given $1bn to waste of tax payers money like DUB were then I think SNN would make a go of it much better. T2 is a farce, paid by mostly people outside the DUB area.
From the Commission For Aviation Regulation determination on the charge that the IAA can levy for ATC services.
This is the trigger to start a new TWR.
I would assume the DAA trigger for a new RWY is the same.
The Commission For Aviation Regulation regularly reviews the Passenger charges that the DAA can levy.
Welcome to the Commission for Aviation Regulation Ireland, About the Commission for Aviation Regulation, CAR website Ireland, Commission for Aviation Regulation Website
The Commission has included a trigger in the formulae that will increase the
price cap should passenger numbers at Dublin airport exceed 23.5 million in a
12-month period. The increase is calculated to be sufficient to allow the IAA to
build a new control tower or adopt an alternative technological solution such
that it can continue to provide aviation terminal services at Dublin airport
should the DAA build a second runway there.
price cap should passenger numbers at Dublin airport exceed 23.5 million in a
12-month period. The increase is calculated to be sufficient to allow the IAA to
build a new control tower or adopt an alternative technological solution such
that it can continue to provide aviation terminal services at Dublin airport
should the DAA build a second runway there.
I would assume the DAA trigger for a new RWY is the same.
The Commission For Aviation Regulation regularly reviews the Passenger charges that the DAA can levy.
Welcome to the Commission for Aviation Regulation Ireland, About the Commission for Aviation Regulation, CAR website Ireland, Commission for Aviation Regulation Website
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was due to fly with US Airways on Sunday and they managed to cancel both of their flights out of DUB because of technical problems. This summer they have dropped below American who have got themselves together and their OPT is almost prefect. After last summer I wouldn't go near AA again but US are worse.
One thing both carriers have in common besides the upcoming merger is a very aged fleet which go tech every 5 minutes. Cancelled flights must cost them a lot per year.
As we all know T2 is very congested in the mornings but particularly in summer, is it time that the slot coordinator cuts the time some carriers are allowed on the ground for.
Etihad this winter are scheduling a 90 minute turnaround, with a B777 was 2 hours last winter with the A332 and this summer its 2h30m with the B777. If they can get 90 minutes working in winter they should be forced to carry this over to next summer to allow stands be free. EK don't have problem with 90 minutes. The same can be said for US Airways CLT service who have a 2h35m turnaround. I know Pre clearance has a role in that but the arrival could be moved lather.
Getting EY out at 08.20 instead of 09.20 could be a major benefit.
One thing both carriers have in common besides the upcoming merger is a very aged fleet which go tech every 5 minutes. Cancelled flights must cost them a lot per year.
As we all know T2 is very congested in the mornings but particularly in summer, is it time that the slot coordinator cuts the time some carriers are allowed on the ground for.
Etihad this winter are scheduling a 90 minute turnaround, with a B777 was 2 hours last winter with the A332 and this summer its 2h30m with the B777. If they can get 90 minutes working in winter they should be forced to carry this over to next summer to allow stands be free. EK don't have problem with 90 minutes. The same can be said for US Airways CLT service who have a 2h35m turnaround. I know Pre clearance has a role in that but the arrival could be moved lather.
Getting EY out at 08.20 instead of 09.20 could be a major benefit.