It may very well be that you have a good debate here.

BUT........you cannot name names and slag people off unless you can back up what you say and give to PPRuNe your personal details by foregoing your anonymity - just in case PPRuNe has to fight a legal battle - get the idea?

Insults, abuse and general tirades will not be accepted otherwise. Posts are being deleted. The thread is next if you do not control yourselves.

PPP

Ryanair are to add a route to Berlin in June.

The airline that was not going to expand further in Dublin will then operate 52 routes out of the airport...

Things were supposed to improve, I don't think so!!
 

Things were supposed to be improving at DUB, but they haven't, not if this morning is anything to go by. We arrived at the airport at 0500 for an 0630 departure. The set down road was a complete shambles, they've painted "pedestrian safety zones" to replace the real pavement that used to be there, but they don't work, and cars parked at the entrance to the set down road meant that nothing much was getting in, so we abandoned the vehicle ( family member was dropping us off so we could do that), and walked in.

We were on this new FR on line web check in system. I am going to be discussing that in a LOT more detail with some highly placed people at DUB, in that as it worked this morning, the potential security breach that I predicted some time ago was all too possible.

We walked in to the terminal just as the C Pier end security gates were opening, which was just as well, the queue for the other end stretched the full length of the check in area. By luck and luck alone, and NOTHING to do with competent management of the situation, we were through the airside security check by 0510. As I mentioned, we were lucky, we were talking to the passenger next to us during the flight, he arrived at the airport at 0520, and got the the gate at 0620, for an 0630 scheduled departure, and several people in a considerable state of distress and undress arrived and boarded after 0630. We didn't push till 0650.

Now, to the issues. They have at last decided that they can scan shoes without them being removed, but trouser belts still seem to be beyond the technology!

The REAL HOLE. As I mentioned, we were on the FR "online" web checkin system, which in theory, could help. Problem was that if I'd chosen to give a copy of the boarding card to members of my family, and sent them through first, they would have been airside without being checked, as there was NO PHOTO / NAME ID CHECK AT THE AIRSIDE ENTRANCE where they scanned the boarding card to make sure it was valid. FUNDAMENTAL :mad: GREAT HOLE in the system, which will have to be followed up with DAA and other agencies. All they did was scan the boarding card to make sure it was in the system, but they didn't validate the photo ID to make sure that they matched. That is a FUNDAMENTAL MASSIVE SCREW UP with enormous security implications.

They have a new pier in the middle of the airfield, A64 - A71. It's a LONG walk, not helped by massive congestion at the bottom of the short escalator into the "Old" A area, so it's a fight to get past that.

In our case, we arrived at A64 at 0530, so plenty of time for a relaxed drink. WRONG. The one and only hot drink vending machine was "out of order". There is also a coffee / sandwich bar out there. That was not open when we arrived, and eventually opened at 0600, after several flights had already boarded. At 0610, having queued for service, I asked for 2 coffees. "No, can't do that for at least 10 minutes, the machine's not on yet". Simple answer to that, "Forget it", we were due to board in 5. We started boarding at 0615, and eventually pushed at 0650, airborne 0710, arrived BRS 20 minutes late. To add insult to aggravation, FR could not change Euro currency on the aircraft, I tendered 5.50 for 2 coffees ( Yeah!!!), and didn't get the change I was due, "they had no change", on a Dublin based aircraft, on it's first flight of the day, and we were the first customers served.

All in all, if that's the way that things are going to be at DUB this summer, it will be worth looking at driving up to Belfast and flying from there to avoid the chaos that's only going to get worse!!!!! The new A64-71 area has 8 gates, so potentially 1600 passengers in the area. About 250 seats or thereabout, so potential for a lot of disattisfaction there too.

OK, DAA have still a mountain to climb to be even close to getting it sorted, and their track record to date is not encouraging. That's minor compared to the security issues, bearing in mind they've failed one audit not too long ago, and the knee jerk to that made it almost impossible to get through the place. Now, after "resistance" to the new FR check in plans, that's supposedly up and running. All it's done as demonstrated today is totally compromise airside security. That's NOT clever.

My big concern is that the web check in being used by FR is not secure, or, to be more accurate, as operated this morning at DUB, it's not secure. Given the rampant paranoia that surrounds everything to do with aviation now, that's NOT good, or helpful.

Originally Posted by Irish Steve
"The REAL HOLE. As I mentioned, we were on the FR "online" web checkin system, which in theory, could help. Problem was that if I'd chosen to give a copy of the boarding card to members of my family, and sent them through first, they would have been airside without being checked, as there was NO PHOTO / NAME ID CHECK AT THE AIRSIDE ENTRANCE where they scanned the boarding card to make sure it was valid. FUNDAMENTAL GREAT HOLE in the system, which will have to be followed up with DAA and other agencies. All they did was scan the boarding card to make sure it was in the system, but they didn't validate the photo ID to make sure that they matched. That is a FUNDAMENTAL MASSIVE SCREW UP with enormous security implications."

I fly frequently with BA and BMI using their online check-in. At all the airports I have passed through using the system they only scan the boarding card. No ID check is made. If you fly domestically with BA and BMI you don't even show any ID to board the aircraft. This ID check was started by the LCC's to stop you giving your ticket to someone else if you couldn't travel.

Oh for goodness sake ! If you travel domestic on BA inside the UK there is no photo-id check at all. Nor on domestic flights in many other European countries either. They manage quite fine without it.

And the only reason airlines in the UK ask for your passport on International flights is to check it is valid as otherwise they can be fined for delivering pax without the right documentation to destination airports.

I know in the US they ask you about 50 times in the airport to show your photo ID. But it is not necessary to ape US ideas in security at every stage.

LCCs like Ryanair and Easyjet in the UK check photo IDs purely as a commercial revenue protection measure to stop businesses buying their very cheap tickets a month ahead and then issuing them on the day to whichever of their staff happen to be travelling, when fares may be 50 times (literally) as much. It is NOT for security.

IrishSteve

Surely by now you must know, that management at the DAA are lacking in intelligence. Having experienced at first hand the antics of senior management at Dublin and the people before him in trying to manage the hole they call Dublin Airport, it is no surprise to me at all, that you are not happy about your experience travelling through this pit.

There was a time 2 years back, when on Saturday mornings in August, congestion on the ramp was so bad that aircraft waited in some cases nearly an hour for a stand...now I see it happening weekdays in May and June. The terminal is so packed especially on a weekend, that I feel that the Fire Officer is leaving himself exposed should an incident occur where a speedy evacuation is required..people are going to be seriously injured in trying to escapte the terminal, never mind what happens to cause it

As an aside, how much time did you have to wait in line to be processed at Immigration when you arrived back to Dublin...I'll almost bet that you did not just walk straight through without a wait

I think some of you have missed the point I am trying to make.

In the "old" system, I went to the airline counter, with whatever was appropriate, ticket or otherwise, and got given a boarding card. There was no way that the same boarding card got issued twice.

Now, I can print my boarding card at home, on my PC, and if I want to, I can make as many copies as I like. If someone else who is not the person named used "my" boarding card, they would have been airside, no problem, and if I then turn up a few minutes later, and the system says, they're already airside, I then produce appropriate evidence that I am the named passenger etc, and I should get access airside. In the meantime, what, if anything, is done to trace the "duplicate" that went through ahead of me, and who has now done whatever they wanted to to get "lost".

I used to work airside, and I can think of a number of ways that I could get out on to the ramp having got airside, and once on the ramp, the possibilities are endless. I am not about to post them here, suffice to say that the new on linecheck in system has some serious security holes that has very little to do with the ID as such, and everything to do with the removal from the loop of the airline computer and checking that only one person has the boarding card. That's the point I am trying to make, that more than one person can very easily get access to a boarding card, not that the ID check is the be all and end all of that process.

I'm not saying it's easy, if it was, I would be even more worried, but with the right knowledge, and a little bit of preparation, it's not going to be that hard, I spent 2 years working on the ramp at DUB post 9-11, so I know the system very well, and also know it's shortcomings, which I am not about to broadcast here for what I hope are obvious reasons:E :E

There are some serious issues here, which appear to have been conveniently "forgotten" when agreeing to the new systems now in place, and if investigated properly, there will be repercussions that could make the transit from landside to airside even more tortuous than it is at present, which has to be bad news for the 20 or so million passengers that DUB thinks it's going to process this year.

It's bad enough now, there are so many unresolved issues at DUB it's no longer a joke, it's gone beyond that, and the most depressing aspect of it all is that DAA seem to think they are doing a good job. All I shall say is that there's none so blind as them that can't see:ugh: :ugh:

Why is the DAA getting all the blame here? Surely FR should be getting some too. Afterall, if this is the case that you can get all the way onboard the a/c without having your ID checked then it is clear that FR have learnt nothing at all from the Dispatches documentary!!! Their busy hosties should also be checking the ID's!

Without wishing to deny the importance of security, I think one key problem is that the DAA has a major problem with long term planning. If you look at the site for the new terminal, not only does it eat into space occupied by an only recently completed pier expansion, but even that space is constricted; there's Corballis House on one side (listed?), there's the cargo terminal and then at the far end of the pier, there's the runway. Now, it occurs to me that only one side of the pier could be used for WB jets, unless they move the cargo terminal ... but where to?

We heard, only a few weeks ago, that the building itself has to be increased in size because of growth plans by EI and FR, BUT ... that's hardly news. A new passenger terminal should be planned with around 10-15 years growth; to have to review plans after less than a year is surely unacceptable. Even if they do increase the size of the terminal, there is still room for only one pier; now how many WB aircraft can be parked at that pier - 4, max? And possibly only on one side. And how long is that going to last, at the growth rates currently being achieved. It's hardly news to anyone that EI wants to grow its long haul operation; the airline has long talked of about 14 long haul aircraft, so what's the point of introducing a terminal with space for only four long haul aircraft? (And then there's other airlines' aircraft). And this terminal is supposed to accommodate growth until when?

This, added to the runway length issue and the failure to provide cargo facilities, must surely point to a serious crisis, yet the govt has been content to simply sign over responsibility for the airport to the DAA, without any oversight or interference.

This simply cannot go on. Lessons are not being learned. As an island nation, Ireland needs a very aggressive, pro-active and growth orientated aviation policy, but the whole handling of this shows that the interest simply isn't there at govt level.

From RTE's website:

This is very disappointing; I'd been waiting anxiously for this - on tenterhooks!

Can't they just negotiate with the planning people? Surely intense (ouch!) negotiations should do the trick

Seriously, though, did nobody in the DAA's planning department (quickly becoming an oxymoron) pipe up and say "we might need planning for this!"; this proposal is hardly new. We can express resigned acceptance of the fact that they can't plan a new terminal … but not being able to plan a tent, I mean - come on!!!!

Still, not the end of the world; they can always hand out umbrellas.

(Just a thought; if they put the waiting area in a covered part of the parking lot - say level 4 or 5, they wouldn't need a marquee? It's the same thing, surely, … to all intents and purposes? )

the reason I am being so vocal about this is simple. FR have succeeded in "simplifying" the check in process so that they don't have to deal with a queue of people at check in just to give them a boarding card. OK, so far, no problem with that, the on line check in process requires that the person checking in has the details of the flight that has been booked.

However, and this is where I get more uncomfortable, I now have on my PC, and printable as many times as I care to print it, a boarding card for a specific flight. I arrive at the airport, and proceed directly to the security check to go airside. All that was checked on Saturday morning was my FR boarding card, printed on my computer. If I had printed more than one, and given it to "AN other", if AN other had gone through security before me, then IF the FR system had said "The boarding card has already been scanned", I produce Valid ID and have a hissy fit that I'm being denied boarding.

If I get airside, which I should, then the person who went before me has got airside when they should not. My "reason" for requiring to go back in again could also be "I forgot something from my car so had to go back to the car park to get it", so the ONLY way to maintain security in this scenario is to check the ID AND the boarding card, and make sure they match AT THE POINT OF ENTRY TO AIRSIDE.

At that point, this is nothing to do with the specific flight, and everything to do with that a person with no business airside has got past the airside security check. Believe me, once that has been done, having worked on the ramp at DUB for several years, I can think of several ways that it would then be possible to get from airside to the ramp. I am not about to disclose them here!!!!

Once on the ramp, it would be possible to do quite a few things that would be "inappropriate".

FR check IDs on boarding, and do a head count, so this is NOT about someone getting on to a flight that they are not ticketed for, and EVERYTHING to do with the airside security system being breached.

I made representations at the time this was announced that there were massive holes in this concept, I was told, "it's sorted", and Saturday morning has proved to me that it is not, for exactly the reasons I gave at the time.

Surely the problem is stopping unauthorised people getting from the passenger area airside to the ramp rather than stopping people getting airside. I'd be a little disturbed if an passenger with a legitimate boarding card was wandering around the ramp.

Incidentally, I have noticed one potential immigration issue at Dublin. Certain flights from outside the common travel area with the UK land at pier A (for example Ryanair from Beauvais or Charleroi). With the cooperation of an EU citizen living in Ireland, someone could use this fact to bypass immigration.

Basically, what the person would do is book a flight into Ireland from one of these origins. The local resident would book an internal Irish flight on Aer Arann, check-in and proceed to Pier A. At Pier A, they would hand the boarding card to the person who has arrived and not cleared immigration. The local resident could then come back out of Pier A showing a legitimate passport while the person who hasn't cleared immigration could board the flight to Knock/Kerry/Sligo etc where their ID wouldn't be checked (Also, Aer Arann (legitimately) never check ID while boarding internal flights).

I doubt anyone's ever tried it, but it has the potential to be used.

Irish Steve,
BA have been using online check-in successfully now for about a year and it has been introduced more or less worldwide in that time. BA customers (except ex USA where they must ID themselves to a member of BA staff at checkin) can proceed all the way to the gate without having to show any ID to anyone. Whether you think this is right or wrong, it has obviously undergone thorough checks and has had the sign off from the airline and airports security experts otherwise it would not be happening.
My worry would be if the staff at the gate (in the case of FR the cabin crew) are not checking the ID's as the pax board the aircraft.
Having spend three years working on the ramp in DUB both before and after 9/11 I too am all too aware of the security loopholes in the airport (remember that landside lift beside Hughes and Hughes where one could get into the baggage hall without a security and check in agents often took passengers down if they left something in their luggage that they needed? :ugh: ) but I am also aware that there have been major improvements since and I dont feel that the online boarding pass is a big threat to the airport.

EI-RB

Pier A at Dublin is the only Pier, where arriving and departing Passengers mix quite freely. The DAA are now putting many non CTA flights into Pier A and all mix freely, I guess its only a matter of time before something has to happen for the DAA to change things :ugh: :ugh:

Irish Steve, I accept your concerns regarding potential security breaches at Dublin Airport. Are yanair to blame in any way, I think not.
Ryanair's online checkin is a logical progresive move to improve checkin procedures for passengers and reduce costs to the airline. It is only a matter of time before it is adopted by every airline worldwide. I am sure EI are asking themselves why they invested so heavily in Easy check in when all they had to do was ask their customers to print off their own borading cards at home or at the office before the left for the airport. I know you still can't check in bags when you check in online but perhaps it will be that case in the near future as many US carriers now offer that service.

Yes, there is the potential for an "unauthorised" person to be airside if they get a DIY boarding card from someone else but surely if two people were adament to get one airside for the purpose of getting access to the ramp to make a political statement or commit an act of terrorism then why don't they just buy a ticket, check in online themselves, proceed thru security with their own boarding card and ID and go about their business. This way they don't run the risk of alerting security to their plans.

I have been comuting between SNN and STN for the past two months and in the past few weeks being able to check in online at SNN has been fantastic. Finish work at 1515, airport by 1530, boarding gate by 1540 (just in time to hear my name being called to identify myself as an online pax), catch the 1605 to STN and I am sitting in my local in Stansted village by 1730 if everything goes on schedule. I must congradulate Ryanair for enabling me to do this. Yes they are doing it in order to reduce costs but I save heaps of time and in business isn't time equal to money?

GP

Ryanair to launch six new routes from Dublin
 

Ryanair is to announce six new routes from Dublin within the next 4-6 weeks. The new routes would not begin until December, when DUB's new basement check in area is open.

While the airline is obviously staying tight lipped about this, one can possibly make a few guesses, judging by recent comments (including an interview with MO'L in today's Business Post):

Marseilles (new base, opening later this year)
New route to Morocco
New route to Poland (possibly 2)
New Irish domestic routes: Kerry/Shannon - possibly Derry too?
Stockholm - Skavska?

DUB-Marseilles was announced last December

Aren't FR not expanding to Sweden while issues about a new tax onnplane passengers are sorted out

Oslo Torp is another gap in FR's DUB route network

Never second guess Ryanair. We heard they were starting 11 new routes from Liverpool in October which would feature two new countries not served from Liverpool. The rumour mill duitifully churned and came up with a list of destinations which were:

Salzburg (Austria - new country), Bratislava (Slovakia - new country), Valencia, Almeria, Frankfurt Hahn, Hamburg Lubeck, Stockholm Nykoping, Wroclaw, Lodz, Bologna Forli and Eindhoven. And what did Liverpool get?

Aberdeen, Alghero, Ancona, Inverness, Kaunas, Krakow, Poznan, Santander, Santiago de Compestela, Tampere and Wroclaw. (Well, one out of eleven can't be bad!!!). The new countries were Finland and Lithuania.

Does anyone know if there has been any interest by airlines to restart the Plymouth route?

:E

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.

with the oil spill, and the aa 777 diversion, there was even talks of shutting the airport down, because of lack of fire crew to manage with the rest of the airport!

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?:rolleyes:

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.

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.

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.

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!

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."

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!!!!

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.

A narrow minded government like ours,a few years ago refused permission for BD codeshare with UA on LHR-DUB,because the flight did not stop at SNN.:sad:

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?

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.

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!

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.

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!

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!

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.

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.)