DUBLIN

[Hansol]

What was the problem at DUB this morning? I understand it was closed for a short time for an "emergency"?

[epreye]

Hansol from what I hear, a major emergency plan in operation at Shannon, and "emergency landing" due in the next hour. Local radio mentioned an aircraft with 5 on board. Sorry, that's all I have at present.

[Skytrucker]

Apparently someone spilt some Guiness in the terminal. Could have heard a pin drop. :p

[epreye]

This is from the RTE Website re DUB:
Passengers have been evacuated from a plane at Dublin Airport after fears of a fire on board.

Aer Lingus flight EI432, bound for Milan, was about to take off when the pilot reported there was smoke in the cabin.

61 passengers were evacuated via the plane's emergency chutes.

[Lee-a-Roady Moor]

According to reports, the Aer Lingus 432 flight to Milan was delayed due to wx in Milan. While on the ground, smoke was reported in the cabin.

Shutes were deployed and all evacuated. 1 CC member sustained injury, but otherwise all ok and having breakfast while awaiting replacement aircraft.

No fire found, and cause of smoke is being investigated.

[epreye]

Re: Shannon emergency

Heard it is a Galaxy east bound. Reported tyre fire (where fire occurred I don't know) 61 souls on board. Landed uneventfully, all OK, emergency services stood down.

[Rotorbike]

The Shannon Emergency was a C17 Loadmaster with hydraulic problems. Circled over Cork for an hour to burn down fuel and landed without requiring further assistance.

Well that's the one I was got out of bed for.

[Otto Nove Due]

Looks like they changed aircraft and continued on with one less passenger! Scheduled departure time is 07:20, left over 3 hours late.

AER LINGUS - EI 432


Operational Flight Information
Airport Hour FLIGHT INFORMATION
Dublin (DUB), Dublin, Ireland 09:00 NEXT INFO WILL BE AT
Dublin (DUB), Dublin, Ireland - RCRAFT DEFECTS
Dublin (DUB), Dublin, Ireland 10:25 ESTIMATED TIME OF DEPARTURE
Dublin (DUB), Dublin, Ireland - RCRAFT DEFECTS
Dublin (DUB), Dublin, Ireland 10:21 LEFT THE GATE
Dublin (DUB), Dublin, Ireland 10:30 TOOK OFF
Dublin (DUB), Dublin, Ireland - NGERS ON BOARD 60)
Dublin (DUB), Dublin, Ireland 03:01 PLANE IS LATE IN HOURS MINUTES)
Dublin (DUB), Dublin, Ireland - CHANGE
Linate (LIN), Milan, Italy 13:49 ESTIMATED TIME OF ARRIVAL
Linate (LIN), Milan, Italy 13:41 AIRCRAFT LANDED
Linate (LIN), Milan, Italy 13:46 ARRIVED

[EI-MICK]

one less crew maybe,a cabin crew member was takin to hospital.

[Runway 31]

An earlier report stated 1 crew member was injured in the evacuation. Hope they are all right.

60 passengers isn't very many. What type an aircraft would be used on this flight, A320?. They can't be making much money with a load like that.

[irishair2001]

Sorry Rotorbike ,

But I think you mean a C-17 Globemaster,not a Loadmaster

[EI-MICK]

well maybe called a loadmaster when you consider the ammunition it was carrying!!

on the aer lingus incident,it was just precautionary the cc member going to hospital,think it was just a leg injury.

[840]

It's not on the website yet, but according to Irish media, Ryanair have announced Dublin-Kaunas.

Also, this may be old news, but Centralwings will launch Dublin-Lodz and Dublin-Gdansk

[airhumberside]

18 new Ryanair routes announced today. 5 New based B737-800's. 1.5 million extra Ryanair passengers each year at Dublin

New routes

FRANCE - Marseille, Nantes and La Rochelle
GERMANY - Baden (Stuttgart) and Hamburg
POLAND - Krakow, Poznan and Wroclaw
ITALY - Milan and Venice
SWEDEN - Gothenburg and Malmo
SPAIN - Valencia
PORTUGAL - Porto
AUSTRIA - Salzburg
SLOVAKIA - Bratislava
LITHUANIA - Kaunas
UK - Humberside

Increased Frequencies

Dublin – Frankfurt increases to twice daily
Dublin – Barcelona increases to daily
Dublin – Faro increases to daily
Dublin – Malaga increases to 8 per week
Dublin – Carcassonne increases to 5 per week
Dublin – Biarritz increases to 4 per week
Dublin – Lodz increases to 3 per week

[airbourne]

What are the possibilities for a City Airport in Dublin? Apart from the obivious, the price of property, why hasnt there been a case for a City airport. Belfast have one, why not Dublin, or even Cork. The congestion at DUB puts off a lot or people. Why take a flight when in just over 2 hours, you could be in Befast or Galway. If any of the Irish boys can answer that, its appreciated!

[MarkD]

airbourne

the property men are making way too much money building apartments and financial blocks to allow docks to be paved over. Plus if flightpaths were anywhere near Dublin 4 the delicate souls there would have a fit!

[irishair2001]

The idea was around some years back,shortly after LCY opened,someone in Dublin proposed the building of a LCY style airport at a sight near Fairview Park,which is about 3 miles from O'Connell Street,I d'ont know what happened,but a new road was built on the proposed sight.

[apaddyinuk]

That and the fact that when there is no traffic you could technically be in o'connel street in about 15 mins from the current airport...of course, I am talking theoretically here!!! :p

[MarkD]

DAA (owned by govt remember) would go ape at any capacity being removed from DUB to "Dublin City" since that would reduce the case for 10L/28R. (edit:oops got my runways wrong way round!)

BHD is the Shorts runway, isn't it? In which case they were only making more use of what was already there.

Also - BHD has continual trouble with strict opening hours, hostile pols and has reached the passenger cap.

[ElNino]

Dublin Aiport is only 5 miles from the city centre, hardly miles away. A decent rail link would obviously be a cheaper and better solution than a city airport.

[JDB1052]

Dream on . . .

What is needed is a development such as Weston (although planning may stop this) which serves the south and west of the city, including easy access from Kildare and Meath and the southern parts of the M50.

Dublin Airport is fast becoming inaccessible at other than off-peak times for many of us who live south of the river due to the congestion on the M50 (unless you leave a few hours travel time) - a useful measure would be the number of people from this region who would consider flying Dublin to Cork if it used Weston.

There is absolutely no need for a new airport to provide better access to the city centre - the 8km taxi journey from DUB once the Port Tunnel works finish will be as good as many "city" airports, plus if the visitors want to visit the IFSC and docklands, the taxi can spend a few extra quid to use the tunnel and shave ten minutes at least of the trip time.

Give Dublin Airport a speedy security process (giant leaps have been made in the last few months), speedy car park access (at non-extortion rates), direct metro link and speedy runway access and it would be perfect for city centre access.

[malagajohn]

Mark D is correct - the only reason that Belfast has a city airport is taking advantage of the Shorts runway that has been there for years - if that never existed , Aldergrove would be the only airport in Belfast

[ALLMCC]

Just to clarify a few facts about BHD - it was indeed previously operated by Shorts/Bombardier but is now operated by Ferrovial - the land including the runway (which was totally resurfaced last year) is actually owned by Belfast Harbour Commissioners.

The passenger cap has now been removed and most of the hostility has come from its competitor on the shores of Lough Neagh.

Quote "if that never existed, Aldergrove would be the only airport in Belfast" - true, except for the fact that it isn't anywhere near Belfast (15 miles away) with second rate road connections and no rail link - the main reasons why BHD exists and is increasingly popular.

[eastern wiseguy]

When was the passenger cap lifted? I have been out of the country and can find no reference to it.

As to being in the heart of Belfast yes you are. BUT you have a small runway ...limited hours ...well you do the search.. we have been over this ground many many times. As to NOT being in Belfast that would be the same as Heathrow NOT being in London ..Schiphol NOT being in Amsterdam ...the airports all have that in common. Of course there is a demand for the smaller less busy subsidiary type of airfield..the type that closes before folk could get home from having a proper work day in London,or which has flights cancelled left right and centre by those people who don't want you easily misled but if you need 24 hour opening, sensible technical facilities,and a wide range of EUROPEAN and NORTH AMERICAN destinations/connections the only choice is NORTHERN IRELANDS airport.

Happy new year to all(mcc)

[akerosid]

Dublin posted another impressive year of growth this year, with traffic increasing by 8% to 18.4m; UK and domestic traffic dragged down the overall performance, the highlights of which were Europe and t/a flights.
Given the route plans already announced, particularly by Ryanair (whose increase alone should be sufficient to bring DUB over the 20m mark this year, not to mention new routes by EI and various other carriers), 2006 looks like being very good too.
However, there seems to be three major issues on the horizon:
- Terminal capacity; this is probably the least of the problems in that decisions have been taken (albeit like extracting teeth from a feral crocodile) and hopefully Pier D will get under way;
- Runway capacity, I think, will be the big issue. Last year, there were 182,000 movements; there's no figure available this year, but even if it increases by 5% (less than the pax no.) it will still be over the 190k mark and this year will almost certainly see it exceeding the 200,000 mark - probably quite handsomely. Now, what's with the parallel runway? Haven't heard much about this and it seems that the schedule has slipped to about 2012-13; at the rate growth is running at the moment, it's quite possible that DUB could be at the limit for a single runway (remember 11/29 will have to be decommissioned as part of the 10L/28R works) and will have to start turning away traffic. This issue needs to be pushed forward.
Of course, the increased congestion means that the chances of extending the runway (such as they were) are zilch, so DUB is stuck with the shortest runway of any major airport in Europe for the next 6-7 years, and that's certainly going to curtail some long haul growth opportunities, in particular ...
- Cargo. An Taoiseach and three of his happy band (and lots of business leaders) are off to India, to build up trade links, as part of the govt's Asian growth strategy. Great news and it's about time India and Asia generally were recognised as markets for trade and tourism. BUT ... with the new T2 blocking off cargo parking stands for large aircraft and any extension of the cargo terminal, the airport's opportunities to develop cargo handling capacity are going to be limited; cargo figures for DUB have been flatlining around the 150,000t mark, well below potential. There doesn't seem to be a recognition by the DAA of the importance of this issue and given that Mr. Cullen recognised DUB's position as part of the state's critical infrastructure, they're going to look mighty stupid when it emerges that growth potential is being held back by a lack of freight and runway capacity within the next few years.
Time for pitchfork mode again ... :*

[Persimmon]

Effective 1 March 2006.
Just announced on Manx Radio. They say due to "over capacity"

[atprider]

Does seem sensible - however looks a little like giving up the fight with Aer Arann on their home patch.
Does this then mean increased efforts to push REA off the other routes that they compete on perhaps?

[Hansol]

Perhaps the IOM Government will get the message that their open sskies policy can't work. It woudn't wpork woth the ferries and it won't with the airlines. I think the consolidation on the Island will contine.

[San Expiry]

Also the RJs are going back within the next week and there's talk that the Dorniers are to bite the dust as well. 13 routes and 6 aricraft to 4 routes and 2 aircraft in just more than 6 months - can't look good, surely?:ugh:

[Hansol]

Aviation is a tough business, especially tough on the IOM. I think its called injecting a little bit of realism into the market.

[granddaddy]

So what about overcapacity to MAN,LPL and on London routes????:ok: ::confused: :confused:

[jabberwok]

So what about overcapacity to MAN,LPL and on London routes????:ok: ::confused: :confused:

Overcapacity will always lead to further casualties.

[euromanxdude]

As both my girlfriend and me work for 3W, we are both supportive of the decision not one that was probably taken lightly [ IOM-DUB been the 1st route operated by 3W]. However we can concentrate our resources more now on the 4 core routes we have left and the 3 we have serious competion on.
Happy flying:cool:

[manx crab]

Does this mean that they will be able to operate all services without the Dorniers?.
Strikes me as all a bit sudden, the vultures must be getting ready to take off, anyone betting on Aer Arran taking them over?

[Hansol]

manx crab - aa are in a far worse state then EM in the IOM their loads are awful.

[manx crab]

Hansol- Looking at the official airport figures, its clear that Aer Arran is not doing as well as EM.
But I think the issue here is who's prepared to stick it out as it is obvious to everyone but the Government that the current situation cannot continue. I would think that Arran believe that EM is a wounded animal and I am sure are surprised that they are still here. But who has the deepest pockets?

In my opinion we would not be in this situation if the EM operation we have now had been in place last year, not the grandiose fiasco that actually was.

[Hansol]

I don't think deep pockets come into it, no one has the stomach for a fight. Why win a route through competition merely to have the government invite another operator in

[manx crab]

I don't think there are that many other airlines out there to come onto the routes.
Perhaps Emerald will make yet another return when their contract expires. None of the LCC would come here unless they were paid as there is not enough business and the airport charges are too high.
Some sort of user agreement with strict controls on frequency and fares is what is really needed but I would not count on the position changing until after the election in November.
EM's performance last year really worried the Government and it will take a long time for the confidence to return.

[boris]

The government wouldn't wear a user agreement way back, when there was a successful airline in situ and LHR slots were still on the table.
I would suggest, therefore, that it is unlikely now, as such an agreement could easily be construed as a bailing out a failed carrier.

[manx crab]

You have to remember though that the airline in question, although reliable, had relatively high fares. I doubt that such a product would be politically acceptable today when the public sees all the LCC adverts in the UK press.
The trouble is that if an airline gets monopoly/near monopoly then the prices rocket, look what happened last summer to the EM fares to LPL after Emerald stopped flying.
The mystery to me is why Flybe almost completely pulled out, I would have thought that several of the routes would have fitted their business model

[boris]

M C,
Perhaps the fare levels were required in order to properly fund a specialised short-haul service. Certainly the Island has suffered in terms of service since the cuts imposed by BA from the old Manx Airlines network.
The Farecracker fares, if you remember were real 'Lo Cost' items and were partcularly innovative at the time; just £1 more than the Steam Packet and that on a monopoly route!
Years back, the Manx Government realised that an agreement was necessary in order to protect the security of surface transport, (Manxline/Sealink), hence the user agreement for the Port of Douglas and it's infrastructure.
As far as I can see, they (the government) encourage Airlines into the Island and then encourage competitors against them. The resulting cut-throat competition is great in the short-term and on traditional LoCo routes but history seems to demonstrate that it is inappropriate on the lifeline routes to and from the island as evidenced by sea transport.
Don't mis-understand me, I am all in favour of cheap fares, but NOT if they undermine the stability of lifeline services and the very viability of operators.
Perhaps the cost of transport is one of the downsides of living on an island of only 75,000 people in the middle of an inhospitable sea!

[EI321]

Anyone got news on dublin? I wonder when pier D is to start construction, should start this summer. Plenty of new routes this year, and dubai starts next month. Theres also the plan to put the FR desks into the basement - whats happening there?

[akerosid]

No more news about the new terminal. Nothing about the runway or nothing about increased cargo facilities. They've very quiet right now.

There is positive news about new services, but without the capacity, we run the risk of making the same mistakes again. The govt made great play about the importance of trade with China and India (Bertie) and the new bilaterals with Singapore and Thailand (minister), but we've seen no movement on anything.

Unfortunately, political attention has been focused on the M50 and the troll issue(or was it tolls?) Anyway, they're just not focused on aviation - nor, unfortunately, are the media or the opposition, so little wonder that the govt can get away with such a pitifully inept, disinterested and visionless aviation policy.

There's a lot of negative media comment about the minister, who really doesn't seem up to it, but Bertie put him there - with clear knowledge of his record. It can't help, at cabinet level, with cabinet colleagues likely to dismiss any innovations/developments more readily ... if there were any, of course.

[Tom the Tenor]

For the DAA's pleasure Cork Airport with her wan airbridge and her happy clappy board and in a spirit of supreme, magnificent sacrafice agrees to take on the burden of building Termial Delta at Dublin! The masses in Dublin can sleep soundly in their beds tonight along with their brothers in Clare! :rolleyes:

[skiddyiom]

From what I can gather, 3W are consolidating their routes and aircraft, which will give them a sound basis to start making real progress.

The Dorniers are slated to go shortly, the RJ's having already gone (I belive the last went today, Monday). I am also led to belive that there is another 1, or maybe more, Dash 8's in the pipeline. Single type operation will also make things easier for them.

Whatever happens, I sincerely hope they succeed in their venture. I may work for the Greasy Spoon airline (BACON) but that's not to say I want them to go under.

skiddy

[EI321]

Regards the New terminal and Runway, expect nothing significant for at least a year as both are still in the early planning stages. The time scales for both remain in place. The next steps are to appoint main contractor, architect, engineers etc to the T2 project, expect no concrete design to be unveiled for a year at least. There is also the extension to the current terminal which was recommended in the report by pascal / watson. Ive heard nothing new about this extension.
A new extension (non public ie staff only) is to be built onto Pier C, this has already been submitted for planning permission.
Temp LCC pier (this has full planning permission already) to be erected on the pier D site for the summer.
By the time EI starts Dubai,transfers will again be possible with a new desk in arrivals. - great for the airports chances of attracting more l/h flights
The facelift of the Pier B Retail area continues, and part of the mezzaine food floor will now be accessable straight from 'the street' area.
The arrival of DLs additional JFK and ATL flights this year will presumably cause more problems to the already outgrown US Immigration area and affect morning stands availibility of Pier B.

[akerosid]

Que? What the hell are they playing at? The runway should be well past the planning stage by now! This is appalling (although not necessarily surprising); someone needs a pitchfork in the rear. The sooner they bring in the likes of SATS (the crowd who run Changi) or someone similarly competent and take over mgmt of DUB the better. The schedule is slipping and the more it slips, the longer we're stuck with a runway that's 1500' too short.

Anyway, the following PQs were tabled last Wednesday, which should throw some light on the current situation. (Sorry about the double spacing in the response; it's just the way it copied.)


Dáil Question
No: 124, 150
*To ask the Minister for Transport the progress to date in 2006 in the
development of a second terminal at Dublin Airport; if this project can be
operational by 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
- Damien English. (Nominated by: Olivia Mitchell).
For ORAL answer on Wednesday, 1st February, 2006.
Ref No: 3337/06 Lottery: 16

*To ask the Minister for Transport if his attention has been drawn to the
cost to develop pier D at Dublin Airport; if the authority has sought an
increase over that which has been sanctioned for this project; his views on
the need for this increase; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
- Gerard Murphy. (Nominated by: Olivia Mitchell).
For ORAL answer on Wednesday, 1st February, 2006.
Ref No: 3336/06 Lottery: 43

Answered by the Minister for Transport
(Martin Cullen TD)
REPLY

I propose to take questions 124 and 150 together.

Under the Dublin Airport Authority’s (DAA) medium term plan for new infrastructural provision at Dublin Airport published last Autumn, a new
Terminal and associated pier facilities (Pier E) will be provided to the
South of the existing terminal. These facilities are due to come on stream
in 2009. The plan also provided for other capacity enhancements including
the provision of temporary pier facilities in 2006 and a permanent new
pier, Pier D, to be in place by late 2007. These new pier facilities will
deliver significant additional aircraft contact stands for fast turnaround
operations.

In relation to Terminal 2, I understand that the DAA has progressed with
the procurement of the Project Management and Design Teams for the project
and that the Authority will shortly announce the outcome of the bidding
process. Work will commence immediately on the planning application and in
this regard, preliminary consultation with Fingal County Council has already taken place. The DAA is working to the Government decision to have
the terminal operational by 2009.

The specification and cost of Terminal 2 will be independently verified by experts on behalf of the Government. Also, at the appropriate time, an independent body will manage an open tender competition to select an operator for the new terminal.

The cost of developing Pier D at Dublin Airport is an operational matter for the DAA. The final tender costs won’t be fully known until the Authority is in a position to place the procurement contract. I understand that the Authority is currently actively engaged in the procurement process for Pier D and expect that the process will be completed and a contract awarded within a matter of weeks. It is the intention of the DAA, that the new facility will be operational by late 2007.

[manx crab]

Boris
I agree about higher fares being necessary to maintain a viable and reliable service. I suppose Eastern is the nearest to Manx that we have, but just look at the yearly passenger figures on the routes they operate.
This policy of the IOM Govt of actively encouraging multiple airlines on routes from the IOM seems to me to be an overeaction to the situation that they were faced with during the first half of last year when there must have been the distinct possibilty that they could have lost the two main carriers to the Island, albeit for entirely different reasons.
Presumably, further retrenchment will follow, Man is the most obvious one but I think EM pulling off the Dublin route must give Arran encouragement to stick with it.

[EI321]

There it is then, no delays with T2 etc as yet, timesales remain in place.

Anybody any news on new s/h flights for summer? Im still waiting for Aeroflot, what the hell is taking them so long!

[euromanxed]

RJs gone already? 328s next?!?
So why are we back to having Air Atlantique's ATRs RHUM and DRFC..
THus turns the wheel - soon be full 360
:{

[euromanxdude]

euromanxed.....
HBB is currently away for a sheduled maintenance check....therfore we would need an aircraft to cover the schedule that bravo would have been doing.
And yes rj's have gone unfortantly and soon the 328's..but at least we will then be a single type fleet that will keep costs down.
So really..in my opinion..not really doing the full 360.
have a nice day collegue.:cool:

[euromanxed]

Tks 4 that clarification EMXdude,
though might have hoped EMX planned to use both Emerald's ATPs to fill the gaps. Comment on 360 alluded to returning to use of AirAtlantique/ic wet-leases, though I miss the occasional Air Wales ATRs..
:)
Great idea to have a single craft fleet, a no-brainer.
So why didnt they do that at the outset,
instead of painting up 3 types in EMX c/s?

Ah well, all history now.
Fingers crossed they keep in air before my vouchers expire at Easter
:oh:

[WHBM]

Went through Dublin today to/from LCY.

It's Easter week. One of the busiest of the year. Big crowds for security etc.

Now whoever decided that it would be this week, of all weeks, that they would resurface the main dropoff road outside departures :rolleyes:

The road planing machine was right there. Half the road width, that nearest the terminal, is all coned off from end to end with the surface planed off. Huge chaos a a result. Talk about non-joined up thinking.

[FlyingV]

Fingal Co.Co. as granted planning permission for the 2nd runway.

http://www.rte.ie/business/2006/0412/dublin.html

Locals will appeal of course.

[akerosid]

I still think it's absurd that we're stuck with such a short runway (8,650') for the next 6-7 years, without the slightest inclination to address this.

With Bertie and others going off to China, India and other places trying to build trade and with Asian carriers investing billions in new cargo aircraft (not to mention competition from new EU member states for that business), one can only wonder how many opportunities will be turned away? OK, EI can get away with a short runway for its A330s, but if they want to develop long haul routes seriously (or are they keeping it short just to protect EI?), they need to look at this.

Consider also that with fuel prices rising, not to mention environmental concerns, is it really a good idea that all long haul takeoffs will have to be at full welly (forgive the technical term!)?

Although I don't believe for a moment it will happen, the minister should take action on this; inform the DAA of its decision with a given timeframe (say Summer 2008) and if that's not met, get in a management team from SATS (Changi) or some other major airport mgmt team.

[irishair2001]

A guys,hold on a minute,

The transport infrastucture of the country among a lot of other things,especially anything to do with aviation is in the ****s and Bertie and the boys are out in India blowing their own trumpet and ramming down peoples throats about how Ireland is the economic jewel of europe and should be studied and copied by other emerging nations,SIPTU must have given him time off for good behavior, but Bertie will use his usual bull**** charm to bamboozle people,because the likes of him has inflickted us with a stigma of "Nudge Nudge,Wink,Wink sure what do you expect w'ere Irish,sure a'rnt we great craic,we always sing a song at a party". Meanwhile the political appointees at DAA fumble around with their grown up lego set to produce a portacabin pier ,albeit a temporary solution,but temporary solutions at Dublin Airport have a habit of becoming permanent structures and yippeeee we got planning permission for a second runway and it will be 500 meters longer than the existing runway,by the time this is built it will be to short and there is no truth in the rumour that the DAA has considered fitting a ski jump to the main runway at Dublin Airport as a temporary solution.

[piston pete]

Now whoever decided that it would be this week, of all weeks, that they would resurface the main dropoff road outside departures

The road planing machine was right there. Half the road width, that nearest the terminal, is all coned off from end to end with the surface planed off. Huge chaos a a result. Talk about non-joined up thinking.

When I saw changes being made to the departures level I thought they had finally copped on that the layout was an accident waiting to happen. Now they've reduced it from 4 lanes to 3 but it's still as chaotic and fraught as ever. I have nearly been hit on two or three occasions on the 'pedestrian crossing' and for the past few days the pedestrian crossing now has no markings at all - just a couple of token cones. Class act.

[Irish Steve]

With the way the "new" departure road has been working, I fear it's only going to be a matter of a short period of time before an excited child that gets away from it's harassed parents is killed in the shambles that is effectively the only road entrance AND exit to the airport, as all private vehicles are banned from the arrival level.

It was bad before they took out the centre divide, it's far worse now, and made worse by their complete inability to think in 3 dimensions, and separate foot passengers and road traffic. The pedestrian crossing in the middle of the setdown area is a nightmare to use and makes it even more shambolic. The first and essential move would be to get the pedestrian traffic that's coming from the multi storey car park separated from the road traffic. The other would be to make it a LOT easier for traffic that's exiting the airport to avoid the terminal road completely, there is way too much "through" traffic that has no business on the set down road in the first place.

There is no way that the present road system is workable any more. There is no way to fix the unfixable, and as far as I'm concerned, what needs to happen now as a matter of extreme urgency is complex, but doable.

ALL staff parking in the multi storey short term car park should be banned, permanently. NO staff, non negotiable, in that car park. Parking for longer than 24 hours for all other than disabled should be priced to the stratosphere, and ONLY available in the C section above level 3, to free up spaces that would then be available for what it's meant to be, a SHORT term car park. Too many times now, I have been unable to get anywhere even close to the terminal with my elderly frail father in law, and level 4 or 5 in the C section is no good for someone who's mobility is severely limited. He can't be dropped off on departures and left to fend for himself, so I have to park up and escort him in. That's not funny from the C section of the multi storey, and trying to get into the disabled section just doesn't happen, it's always full, and there's never any spaces or even a set down area close to the entrance to the terminal.

A LUAS style tram system from the long term car parks, both DAA and competitive organisations, is needed yesterday. Once it's installed, majority of cars be "encouraged" to drop off and collect from new redesigned and appropriate satellite locations at the external car parks, unless dealing with disabled. Before the tram, how about a drop off zone at the long stay, with free bus transfers, and a sensible way to get in and out of that area, so that the car traffic in the terminal area can be reduced.

DAA needs to be "encouraged", by pressure from people that do know what they are doing, to work to get Dublin operating as the major international airport that it is supposed to be, rather than being Ireland's largest pub and shopping Mall, which is what it seems to be trying to be at the moment.

There are so many areas that need urgent attention that it's no longer funny, and there is a total absence of any forward thinking or even joined up thinking to resolve the ongoing major shortcomings that have been apparent for years. The new runway only being 500 Ft longer than the existing one only serves to indicate just how short term they are in their thinking.

It's not just confined to landside. There are fundamental issues airside as well, related to many areas, such as buses to get passengers in from remote stands. Last time I checked, not long ago, FR, who self handle, did not have any servicable buses to get passengers in from remote stands if they can't get a stand on the A pier. The buses used by Servisair are a disgrace, Aer Lingus are doing their best to get rid of their buses, and Aviance had very few in use. Sky Handling have reasonable quality buses, but they dont handle that many of the larger aircraft that need significant numbers of buses to deal with them. DAA has nothing.

The relatively new C pier was so badly thought out, they can't use all of the jetways at the same time for wide bodies, there's not enough space to get them in, and mornings are now a severe pressure period with the number of wide bodies being operated both by schedule carriers and charter operators. The B & C pier can't cope now with the demand, and we're nowhere near the summer peak, EI are already having to delay departures from SNN to DUB now due to lack of space for them at DUB.

DAA are not checking that the handling agents have sufficient equipment to handle the flights they are contracting for. Some while back, one of the main handling agents were contracted for 7 wide bodies at the same time on a Sunday morning, and they were supposed to be able to do that with 5 high loaders, and 6 sets of wide body steps. That's very hard to do when some of them require 2 sets of steps, and at least 2 of the 7 flights required more than one high loader to meet the agreed turnround time.

It was a regular occurence that one or more of the charter flights were delayed by up to an hour, sometimes more, before the bags were offloaded, which caused huge problems to the arriving passengers waiting for bags.

OK, in theory, that's a handling agent issue, but DAA as the airport operator has a responsibility to ensure that the handlers can meet what they have contracted for.

There's plenty of other issues in a similar vein, but DAA has it's head so far up it's rear where operational issues are concerned, it's not going to change for years to come, if ever.

IF DUB is to meet the requirement to be capable of meeting the passenger AND freight requirement in the next 10 years, some very urgent changes in thinking are needed NOW, and some unpopular decisions are going to have to be made by both DAA and the Government.

The traffic in the airport area is already chaotic at times, and just to make it even worse, the Govt has agreed that a MASSIVE IKEA is going to be built less than 2 miles from the airport, and that's going to suck in even more traffic, especially at weekends. Add a match at Croke Park, and the M1 & M50 are going to be gridlocked for hours. Clever? Not really, but that's the level of forward thinking and planning that we're stuck with. Rail link to the airport. With the way things happen here, I doubt I will see that in my lifetime, and I'm still some way from retiring age, to clarify, the M50 had been route planned before I started working in Ireland in 1986, and the last section was only opened this year, 20 YEARS later, and it's already way overloaded and inadequately designed. The port tunnel is due to open later this year, which will mean massive numbers of HGV's also passing very close to the airport, putting even more pressure on the road system.

There's plenty of other issues, but while the politicians are spending all their time worrying about keeping their seats, and where the next brown envelope is coming from, the serious and contentious issues are ignored, or put off until just after a general election, in the hope that by the time the next one comes, their mistakes will have been forgotten about.

All in all, the chances for a vibrant and functioning airport at DUB are probably about as good as the chances of Ireland winning the World Cup:E

[piston pete]

A LUAS style tram system from the long term car parks, both DAA and competitive organisations, is needed yesterday. Once it's installed, majority of cars be "encouraged" to drop off and collect from new redesigned and appropriate satellite locations at the external car parks, unless dealing with disabled. Before the tram, how about a drop off zone at the long stay, with free bus transfers, and a sensible way to get in and out of that area, so that the car traffic in the terminal area can be reduced.


A nice idea but far too innovative for the DAA. Also, we can't even get a rail link to the city centre in place so the chances of getting one to the car parks is pretty slim.

Also Bertie's little 1916 parade will mean getting to the airport from the city centre tomorrow is going to be a nightmare due to the said lack of rail link. Bienvenue a Irlande...


It's not just confined to landside. There are fundamental issues airside as well, related to many areas, such as buses to get passengers in from remote stands.

Yes and this is going to be even more evident than ever this summer. There will be 89 scheduled transatlantics per week from DUB over the period. On top of that you've got the widebodies also operating to BAH, DXB and on the charter runs to SFB, YYZ, etc. Where are they all going to park when you throw in the large growth in short haul movements (particularly Eastern Europe) and how are they going to be turned around on time as things stand?

[asianfly]

Interesting article in the Sunday Times re Dub's ongoing issues.

€8m on Dublin airport ‘bridge’
Brian Carey

THE Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) is to spend €8m on a 250- metre elevated glass walkway allowing passengers access to the new Pier D extension at the capital’s airport.
The decision was forced on the DAA after An Taisce objected to an alternative path through the old terminal building at the airport. The added expense will bring the total cost of the extension to €120m.

The Pier D extension is situated at the far side of the iconic old terminal, a listed building. Desmond FitzGerald, a brother of former taoiseach Garrett FitzGerald, designed the terminal, which now houses the headquarters of the DAA.

It is understood that Catherine FitzGerald, a daughter of the architect, also expressed reservations about making any alterations to the building.

The original planning permission for Pier D included the walkway but the airport authorities reconsidered the option after it faced accusations from airline users, notably Michael O’Leary of Ryanair, that it was “gold plating” facilities to get higher airport charges.

The Pier D extension will open in autumn 2007. The extension will be capable of handling 10m passengers a year.

The cost of the glass walkway will not be passed on to airlines, however, as the DAA has only been “allowed” to recoup €75m of the total construction costs through landing charges.

[akerosid]

Just thinking about the new runway at DUB, due to be open some time in 2013 ...

3,110m - or around 10,200', which is about the length the current runway should be. Okay, the likelihood is that they're not going to lengthen the current runway, but at least they could have learned lessons about leaving the current runway at the length it is, and make sure that the new one has the length to handle current aircraft at MTOW; is 10,200' sufficient to take a 744F at MTOW?

As for the interim period, until 2013, perhaps - instead of lengthening the runway, they could make a focus on air cargo and invest in a marketing program which would focus on attracting new cargo airlines?

It's a real pity that the govt isn't taking an interest in this issue; with all of the junkets (and much as I agree with steps to develop trade links, they are junkets, if they're not prepared to take steps to ensure infrastructure is in place to support planned growth) to Asia, wouldn't you think there would be some level of co-ordination, so that the various departments and agencies could work together to support new routes and the development of new markets.

[irishair2001]

The DAA,
Have absolutely no interest whatsoever in cargo,their attitude is,if you ignore it ,it might go away,it is obvious by the facilities or lack of that they provide,at the moment, with air cargo registering massive growth throughout the world,except Dublin where it has been stagnant or in decline,most of the stands at the cargo shed are occuppied by Cityjet 146s and as far as I am aware ther has been no real provision made for a new cargo facility,when the new Terminal is built, as the proposed terminal will be built where the existing cargo sheds are.

[johnrizzo2000]

Well, at least we finally got a tranfer desk!!!! The problem is that you cant book USA-Europe tickets with EI, you have to make 2 seperate bookings! Maybe they'll change it!

[MarkD]

johnrizzo

try using Expedia to stitch them together rather than aerlingus
?

[HarryBA]

The American Airlines website will enable you to do that.

[JC Novelli]

:\ So there I was credit card in sweaty hand on a website.









British Airways, to be exact. Trying to book a ticket Dub-Noc to see 'dahling mamaaaaa'. Wouldn't let me. Kept getting error and same on timetables.

Getting annoyed so tippety tap over to RE. I'm perusing DUB-GWY times and considering moving back to the 'oul sod' so am ferreting the internals of their web info. Dated 24th April, there's a blah piece about RE being delighted to be back on the NOC-DUB route from 28th May etc.

I am aware of the Loganair restructuring and RE expansion. But when did this happen? Is BA off LDY-DUB too?:ok:

[MarkD]

JCN

doesn't look like it. The a/c on NOC-DUB was probably the same as DUB-GLA but the DUB-LDY is probably on a LDY-GLA rotation too. However, if FR came knocking next PSO round as they did with KIR last time I imagine Logiebear won't be as secure.

I imagine the DoT are vexed since they seem anxious to avoid RE looking like the inhouse airline and yet (as with Euroceltic) it seems to end up that way.

[JC Novelli]

Hmm. So where is the Bank going to go? By grouping these together am I right in surmising that drawing a line from the 2 cash machines across the US and EI charter checkin area down to that 'Sweet Stall' (or whatever it is) and everything therein (toilets? Berbers?) is being removed and new gates in their place?
One half of me wants to *sigh* in terror at the thought that if the DAA's planning already sees the need for a marquee, then its going to be one hell of a summer. On the other hand, at least it seems there IS actually some sort of a planning dept. (or desk....at least).

So they're planning to have a downstairs checkin.....um.....they mean like did, what, 6/5 years ago for the EI Uk regions and LCY flights? HA HA. There's nothing like progressing forward, unlike, say, regressing back. And why are FR being negotiated with? I would presume they should just be TOLD where to go (in so many senses), given the rates THEY pay. (Fold Away/Laptop checkin).

Any plans for a frequent flyer or Fastrack security lane for arrivals and more particularly departures? Couldn't that RE domestic lane be used for Fastrack and be manned 6 - 9 and 5 - 8 Monday to Friday and Sunday say 6 - 8?

[JC Novelli]

JCN

doesn't look like it. The a/c on NOC-DUB was probably the same as DUB-GLA but the DUB-LDY is probably on a LDY-GLA rotation too. However, if FR came knocking next PSO round as they did with KIR last time I imagine Logiebear won't be as secure.

I imagine the DoT are vexed since they seem anxious to avoid RE looking like the inhouse airline and yet (as with Euroceltic) it seems to end up that way.

It is beginning to look that way, isnt it? But why couldnt it have been advertised again, in the hope of Flybe or Britair or Cityjet applying? (I know, shot in the dark!!!) Although no public announcement has been made by BA (marketing carrier) for the withdrawal of the Dub/noc, they had some sort of notice. The jungle drums indicate maybe upto two months notice.(Indications may have emerged from Logieland the week of the summer timetable) Surely enough for a firesale PSO offering? Bung a few extra quid at BA to keep them in situ for a month or two/ get the contracts and wave it imperiously in the Logieland direction to keep them in situ for a month or two.

Btw, not accusing dodgy stuff, just wondering.

[Cyrano]

No, no, don't hold back, Steve, tell us what you really think... ;)

(I do agree, though, that the crossing is already pretty insane and this will only make it worse.)

[MarkD]

JCN

It would have to go via the Official Journal of the EC I suppose which would involve minimum bidding times etc. etc. A temp assignment is what you have to do to prevent interruption in service. RE being an existing PSO holder and with relationships in NOC previously (not to mention a known brand) probably had quietly made crewing contingencies to accomodate a call from DoT which Flybe etc. would not have been ready for.

[JC Novelli]

Thanks!! I knew there was a temporary service derrogation allowed, but will this mean it will be re-tendered in the future.

[MarkD]

jcn

last time around they just ran out the clock until the next PSO round - don't know if there's a limit (next tender is approx. two years from now)

[akerosid]

to quote Baldrick.

Ah yes, they seem to have done it again. Today's Irish Times carries a report to the effect that the new terminal at Dublin may need to be expanded by as much as 50%, to cater for projected demand.

Now, I can't help recalling, through the mists of time to those halcyon days of ... 2005, when six months was spent back and forth, deciding (!) and undeciding, fretting, backflipping, etc. etc. over the whole terminal issue, that a plan was put in place, which we were told would serve us pretty much indefinitely; we'd have a Terminal 2 and then, if the need arose (which it now seems to?) a Terminal 3. The DAA decided it would build a terminal near the end of Pier C and it developed its plan based on that.

It's given (as has the govt) a commitment to have it open in 2009; now, if it goes messing about with a new design, which presumably will need planning permission (?), and now it comes back to say it need more time. TOUGH! They had their time to put together a plan to meet anticipated growth; they seem to have failed. The govt should take a tough stand on this and insist that planning for T3 go ahead and it should take this as another reason why the DAA should not be allowed to manage the new terminal.

Personally, I think it's time for a "nuclear option" to be considered (and not the one the Dear Leader rejected yesterday):

Take the DAA out of terminal management and confine them to airfield management, i.e. the regulatory side of runnning an airport; they would look after fire services, security, runway lighting, landscaping etc etc and professional terminal operators, with a clearly established track record of growth, marketing and customer service (such as Schiphol, SATS etc) would be brought in to operate (or build/operate) the terminals, paying service charges and rental to the DAA.

The only way you're going to drive home to the DAA that the service it provides and its planning cock-ups are unacceptable is to remove responsibility for these issues from them. They've been warned often enough and this simply isn't good enough. At the risk of stating the "bleeding obvious", we're an island nation and we have a greater need than any other country in Europe for an aggressive, growth orientated and pro-active approach to aviation. It should have happened long before now.

[metalboymike]

I read in a local paper that the management at NOC complained to the Dept. of tranport about the service Loganair provided .The loganair was always late departing NOC.

Aer Arann will commence the route starting 28th May.

[johnrizzo2000]

Does anybody know what DAA intends to do once the bank of ireland is removed? The Hughes and Hughes and AerLingus ticket desk are gone, so whats goin there????

Also, its almost may, which means US airways will be back to PHL, Air Canada to YYZ via Shannon, and the 2nd daily Continental flight to EWR starts on May 4th! I have no idea where these aircraft will park during the busy morning rush, because last summer it was a mess!!!! there was EI A330's left right and centre!

[johnrizzo2000]

I still think the positioning of the aerlinhus self-check-in kiosks is idiotic! its right in front of other check-in desks!!!! move them somewhere else that isnt blocking check-in desks!!!!!!!!!!

[johnrizzo2000]

Any idea what the loads are like for GulfAir's flights to Bahrain????? I saw that an A340-300 is scheduled for next wednesdays flight; i though they were just using the A330-200? I had a quick look through the booking for next wednesday's flight, and theres nobody booked in business or first, and less than 30 in economy!!!!:confused:

[akerosid]

Finally, someone has recognised that cargo is an issue:

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/04/28/story256367.html

It's about time, but given its sheer inability to plan for growth of pax traffic, I don't have any hope that it will. So, let's see the score sheet ...

- Runway too short
- Even new pax facilities below required capacity (despite only have been announced last year, after 6 months of consideration)
- No new cargo facilities planned.

Were it not for their being implicated, the Taoiseach/minister should sack the top DAA people and get a new team in place. For a sector of the economy so important, it's criminally negligent.

[akerosid]

The Min. for Foreign Affairs is to raise the issue of fast tracking Ireland - Japan routes in talks with his Japanese opposite number. The minister said that Japan was our biggest trading partner in Asia and that Ireland would be of great interest to Japanese golfers.

Personally I hope something comes of this, but I would think freight links would/should be the priority. Pax flights should definitely happen, but when - well, that's another issue. A330-200s would definitely be the right aircraft for the job.

Not to sound like a broken record, but I think this is exactly the kind of situation where Dublin Airport's failed planning is most evident. In virtually any other major airport in Europe, this would not be a problem - even in the new EU member states, our competition. Dublin should be able to accommodate the cargo growth such routes would allow; again, its runway should be able to offer the potential of nonstop flights by large (particularly cargo aircraft); neither can happen. If DUB is as critical to the infrastructure as the govt says it is (and you can't argue with that), then IT needs to take a more hands on approach and make it happen.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2006/0502/1041682051HM7POLFLIGHTS.html

[PPRuNe Pop]

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

[840]

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...

[Irish Steve]

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.

[Hial Flyer]

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.

[WHBM]

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
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.

[Flame]

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

[Irish Steve]

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.

[Irish Steve]

Its not as easy as you think it is to get out on the ramp.

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:

[apaddyinuk]

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!

[akerosid]

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.

[Cyrano]

From RTE's website:
Airport marquee plans hit by glitch
06 June 2006 13:55
The Dublin Airport Authority's plans to build a marquee on top of the multi storey car park in time for the busy summer season have run into difficulty.
The airport authority has only just announced its intention to seek planning permission for the marquee with Fingal County Council.
The council says it has not yet received any application although there have been a number of pre-planning meetings.
After the application has been received, the council has up to eight weeks to make a decision and there is a further four weeks appeal period.
This means construction of the marquee is not likely to start until August at the earliest.
The Dublin Airport Authority wants the marquee to be a temporary waiting area where they can accommodate passengers delayed due to 'unforeseen events' such as strikes or bad weather.
It would hold more than 1,000 people.
The authority had intended the marquee to be in place by the beginning of June.
Construction of the marquee would entail the loss of around 120 car parking spaces.

[akerosid]

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? )

[Irish Steve]

Why is the DAA getting all the blame here? Surely FR should be getting some too.

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.

[840]

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.

[apaddyinuk]

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.

[Flame]

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:

[Global Pilot]

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

[akerosid]

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?

[airhumberside]

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

[Ametyst]

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.

[WOWBOY]

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

:E

[Irishboy]

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.

[johnrizzo2000]

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!

[Shamrock356]

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:

[DrKev]

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.

[dublinamg]

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.

[Irish Steve]

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.

[johnrizzo2000]

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!

[akerosid]

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."

[johnrizzo2000]

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!!!!

[MarkD]

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.

[irishair2001]

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:

[akerosid]

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?

[Irish Steve]

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.

[johnrizzo2000]

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!

[brian_dromey]

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.

[Shamrock 125]

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!

[johnrizzo2000]

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!

[akerosid]

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.

[akerosid]

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.)

[johnrizzo2000]

Well, work is starting on T2 soon, whether we believe its in the wrong place or not! I forgot about the new runway ruling out T2 being near the current SR technics buildings! Maybe a midfield site, like where the ATC tower and Fire Station is?

[akerosid]

It's too close to the required service entry date of 2009 to be messing about with the design of T2 (when, of course, they actually confirm what it is!) They need to work with what's planned for now, but ensure that the available space is used as efficiently as possible. As I mentioned above, moving cargo ops to a new site west of 16/34 would free up parking space for pax aircraft.

Given the importance of the airport to continued economic growth, it is vital that there is interest at government level - the DAA must be in no doubt that it is being watched by a steely eye and that there will be consequences for making a dog's dinner of things again. Oversight is the key; the government must also be prepared to direct and set out goals, in terms of pax and cargo handling and the future shape and development of the airport.

[MarkD]

The McEvaddy's having bought a strategic piece of land (that AR probably don't want to pay over the odds for) probably doesn't help.

I keep harping on about this whenever it comes up, but the priority should be one single usable terminal. For example - T5 in Heathrow will have enough pax capacity to handle DUB pax for decades. Ditto Pearson "new" T1.

The new stands shouldn't have been lumped onto the existing piers but beside 10/28 between it and the parallel (whenever that happens) - just like at Toronto Pearson. Make that a Ryanair or all-loco 737 optimised pier for simplicity of equipment. The pier can connect for supplies via a cut/cover tunnel which would eventually be covered by 10L/28R and via a bored tunnel for airport buses to run from check-in/bag reclaim+customs at the main terminal or the heritage terminal. I've used YYZ's infield pier twice as SLF and it is not unduly annoying to use, although it adds a bit to your minimum check-in time.

Then you get going on a complete rebuild of the existing main DUB terminal, integrating the old heritage terminal if possible rather than enveloping it, gradually transferring ops to the new building. (It was easier at YYZ as they demolished T1, but they are gradually eating into T2 now which will disappear in due course).

One other thing - the practice of shuttling the Government ministerial aircraft to DUB from Baldonnel to pickup ministers is a disgrace logistically and environmentally and should be stopped.

[brian_dromey]

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.

Fair point that. But if these guys are bad , the Minister responsible for them is utterly inept. It really showed how knowlagable ****** is about his portfolio. He described the opening of the ORK terminal as 'a bloody shambles' and moaned about how much it cost. It was clearly implied that those responsable for ORK should be shown the door. So come on minister, show them the door, but dont forget that its not those at the airport you are visting that are responsible, but those at the airport you are leaving!

[PPRuNe Pop]

Now listen up guys. And I should add this first. I and my colleagues do not have the time or are interested in providing it to those of you who are persisting in innuendo and using names in a fashion which is close to the edge of PPRuNe's strict rules in regard to outing people.

I am going to close this thread for a while - to allow you to recognize where this thread MUST go from here. NO NAMES, NO COUCHING OF NAMES, NO POINTING FINGERS.

Stick strictly to debate. If you are not in a position to decide who what or where about ANYTHING then do not assume that you are and stop this ridiculous attempt at playing CEO.

NOTHING belongs to any one of you so all you can do is discuss it and that is all.

PPP

[The Jolly Roger]

They seem to be leaving people on stand now....better to keep things away from the terminal building i would think!!

[garthicus]

Dublin Airport evacuated amid major security alert



13:58 Tuesday July 4th 2006



Dublin Airport has been evacuated this afternoon amid a major security alert believed to have been sparked by a bomb warning.
Details of the incident are still sketchy, but the terminal building has been evacuated and all traffic is being prevented from entering the airport.

Witnesses said airport staff entered the departures area and told everybody to get out as quickly as possible.

Gardai say the alert was sparked by a suspicious bag in the arrivals hall.

There are unconfirmed reports that a man entered the building claiming to be carrying a bomb.

[selfin]

Another wildly over-the-top reaction designed to breed hysteria.

[egbt]

selfin,

Why do you say that? do you know something we do not?

[selfin]

I should think a fair number of you know enough. If even privately.

[Miles Hi]

Some muppet entered the arrivals hall with a bag over his head screaming its a bomb, it's a bomb.
I would hate to think it was over the top hysteria if this muppet was in fact carrying a bomb, eh Selfin?

[selfin]

And who's going to go to the trouble of preparing one, entering an airport, then telling everyone? It doesn't work both ways. Either you complete the task, or you bring a bag full of bricks.

[Miles Hi]

And if he was carrying a bomb, and they didn't evacuate, would you be happy for the authorities to say ah well, we didn't take him seriously?

Would you be happy with the multiple casualties?

Would you not accept that it's better to be safe than sorry?

I would always prefer to have one lunatic in custody than a hall full of bodies, selfin. Maybe thats why "Hysteria" took hold today.

[colmac747]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0704/airport.html

[selfin]

If you leave that door open for knee-jerk reactions, you leave your society vulnerable to all sorts of exploitation. What sort of economic damage was done today, do you suppose, never mind the loss of peacefulness?

[egbt]

Miles Hi, Quite.

Selfin, conspiracy theories may be entertaining but they are not (usually) the real world. I have personally (many years ago) closed down an ATC unit (on the Emerald Isle) and bought in EOD due to someone’s dirty washing (literally), no one objected because we all knew the danger was real.

You can not discount lunatics, fanatics or “freedom fighters”.

[selfin]

Nor can you dismiss the plethora of rock solid evidence that the vast majority of terrorism we're told about is purely synthetic. I will remain steadfast on this point until more convincing physical evidence to the contrary becomes available - and even then, we'll have some serious rewriting of the laws of physics to do, in order to satisfy the general belief that terrorism is not synthetic.

[Miles Hi]

What sort of economic damage was done today, do you suppose, never mind the loss of peacefulness?

So economics is more important than innocent peoples lives in a civilian airport?

Shame, Selfin.

[selfin]

Innocent lives at risk? At risk from the real threat of death by whom, exactly?

[Miles Hi]

Selfin, they have a man in custody. Whether he was genuine or not, there is tangible evidence that he threathened to blow up the airport.

What next? Do you suggest that Fire Brigades don't attend 999 calls because they think its a hoax? No matter how serious or not a nutjob like this is, he must be taken seriously until the threat is neutralised. Shame, in a civilised society, but it's fact.

[selfin]

EIDW: Some chap, a nutjob - we can agree - strolls into the unsecured side of the terminal claiming to hold an explosive. The airport is evacuated. Aircraft are told to wait, with the doors shut. Airport unusable for a couple of hours. A fair bit of economic damage, plenty of terrified punters, and next we'll have the war-cries for increased security. You call this a civilised society? I call it something else.

If one nutjob can achieve all this on his own, no amount of security will fix the problem. This is a problem which, if treated in the way it was today, will culminate in a seriously terrified and enslaved public.

[Miles Hi]

So Selfin, oh font of all knowledge, pray tell how you would have reacted today, had say, your family been in the terminal. You would have ignored him, because he's a nutter, and he'll go away?

What Rubbish!!!

[Jes]

I really haven't got the time to go into it today, but, as a regular user of Dublin airport, I must say I agree wholeheartedly with Selfin.

[Tone]

1 Evacuate area
2 Ask nutter if he really has bomb
3 If yes, shoot nutter
3 If no bang - clean up mess & reopen area. Shooting justified & nuisance to public minimised
4 If bang - shooting & evacuation justified. Start clean up.

We should start to play without rules, just like they do.

[RoyHudd]

I agree. Time for strength and clear commitment in the face of terrorism. Or simulated terrorism. No let-offs.

[apaddyinuk]

Well Selfin, simple question...would you not have evacuated the terminal or done nothing at all had you been in charge...what if you happened to be standing beside this chap as he walked into the terminal? Would you have at least moved a safe distance away from him JUST IN CASE he was serious? I think you would have.

But I also think you are just enjoying a good wind up on here today so I suggest we all ignore him!

[Tom the Tenor]

Before the day is out it is only right that a certain letter on Dublin Airport to the the Editor of today's Irish Independent should be acknowledged. The letter made a great case for improvements in airport infrastructure at Dublin Airport and how the airport has probably the shortest runway of any capital city so preventing the maximum use of both cargo and passenger aircraft to points in Asia - this despite a huge Irish government presence in Japan and China in recent days promoting Irish commercial interests in the area.

Maybe it is mixing of metaphors but there is no denying the crowd whom are charged with running the State airports at both Dublin and Cork are completely all at sea due no doubt due to the decades and decades of Government impotence in the face of opposition from the lobbies supporting the stopover position at Shannon.

How our nation has suffered for decades at the hands of such incompetence. Dublin and especially Cork goes on to pay every single day becuase of the long political patronage of Shannon because if you think for a second that Cork's new terminal solves everything you are mistaken.

[ryan2000]

Couldn't agree with you more Tom. However it must be said that those that should have known better in Aerlingus and Aer Rianta decided to remain silent about the massive damage that the Shannon Stopover was doing to Irish Aviation.

Dublin is now on its way to being Ireland's true transatlantic airport and SNN may just about hang on to JFK and BOS. Cork should also get a 757 service to these cities if management there play their cards right.

[garthicus]

Here ya go:

A 48-year-old man has appeared in court charged in connection with yesterday's bomb scare at Dublin Airport.

John McHugh, who has an address at Mountjoy Square in Dublin, has been remanded in custody with consent to bail.

Mr McHugh has been ordered to sign on daily at Fitzgibbon Street Garda Station and to stay away from Dublin and Shannon Airports.


Gardaí told the court the man's actions led to Dublin Airport being shut down for two hours yesterday.

Flight schedules at the airport are returning to normal today after the chaos caused by the hoax bomb alert.

The airport reopened at around 4pm yesterday afternoon, but passengers faced huge delays and a heavy backlog of traffic on the roads surrounding the airport for the rest of the evening.

Most flights did eventually take off after a long delay but Ryanair cancelled nearly 20 of its departures to and from Britain and Cork.

[Sumatra]

Would this 48 year old have tried such a stunt if there were armed police / army patrolling? I think the incident clearly shows yet another flaw in Dublin's security.

[st patrick]

Ryan2000, Ei did not remain silent on the shannon stop, in fact I can remember at least one campaign "WHY CANT I FLY DIRECT TO DUBLIN" or something like that. In addition EI went ahead and leased 2x767 to start a direct LAX svc to force the governments hand - all to no avail.

EI-RB, while a direct service to the US from Cork might look like a no brainer, it appears tha the demand is not there. North American Airlines (in assoc with a Cork Travel Agent) planned a 3 times a week svc last year with, as you proposed a B757, and guess what it was cancelled before it even started due to lack of interest!!!

[Tom the Tenor]

Well, if we all have to live with the cursed legacy of the stopover let us turn it all on it's head - why not send one of the snn based EI A330s to Cork twice a week and let her go west from snn if that is the only way around it. If you cant beat 'em with the stopover join 'em!

Diluting of yield, short runway, low cloud, CAT3 too problematic - every conceivable excuse be it credible or no is used to hold back Cork. Shannon has never had some many scheduled flights across the Atlantic as it has this year so there is absolutely no doubt a credible carrier could pull off a flight to America from Cork out of all this combined market from snn which would still leaving snn having a huge lion's share of the total.

As for the last year's fiasco with the Slatterys and Ryan International charters to New York. Cork passengers were betrayed. Up to Christmas the bookings were believed to have been fine and then this 5h!Te about a fuel surcharege was introduced to kill it off. How opportune indeed and it does not take too many guesses where all the benefit later went after following the cancellations.

Cork passengers were clearly betrayed in this matter. How many pax did EI lose from snn and DUB to America when they introduced a fuel surcharge for the first time this summer?

[747boy]

Another scare

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0707/airport.html

[st patrick]

Tom, I`m sorry to have to scupper your great lans for De Capital, but EI has banned its 330s from Cork. The reaon being, Corks Runway is narrower(even including the turning circle) than allowed by Airbus for turns which could cause cracks in the main gear. True its not going to happen onthe first day of operation, but over time it requires additional inspections and maintenance action. The best action would be to get an oul bulldozer and start building that parallel taxiway as so proudly illustrated in the model up in departures!

[speedrestriction]

A bomb scare: Bad luck

A bomb scare and union action: Bad luck and pretty annoying

A bomb scare, union action and another bomb scare this morning: :mad: annoying, wasteful, commercially damaging and bordering on absurd.


Are people who cause this level of disruption (hoaxers, not the unions) not able to contemplate the level of frustration and serious stress they cause to the travelling public and indeed airport employees?


sr

[apaddyinuk]

Well....When they do it in Dublin...THEY DO IT IN STYLE!

[buzzmebaby]

They arnt related, the last one was some nut from the inner city, this one was a bag with a copy of the Koran and medicines in it.

If I were to coordinate the two incidents, I would make sure the two incidents looked unrelated by using two such disparate mules!

[apaddyinuk]

Oh god, the conspiracey theorists are at it again...This should be a laugh!

[buzzmebaby]

apaddyinuk

I'm not saying it is a conspiracy, I just don't agree with shamrocks logic for the two being unrelated.

[corsair]

I believe they found the owner of the bag. I'll bet he was mortally embarrassed. No conspriracy, just paranoia given the the day that was in it.

[Irish Steve]

The latest stupidity is that the metro is being designed with the station that's supposed to serve the airport being planned to be under the Great Southern Hotel. That's over 800 Mtrs from the terminal, the wrong side of all the access roads, and with at present no usable pedestrian links to the terminal. Unless they come up with a VERY good design for a fast, accessible, powered covered travelator/walkway system, then it might be simpler and cheaper to forget the idea, as it won't get used. Could the concept that DAA owns the Great Southern, so will be able to make massive charges for "interlinking" to the terminal perhaps be connected, or is this a way to give DAA a "backhander" to reduce the debt mountain, the "cost" of putting the metro under the hotel needs to be watched VERY closely to ensure that there's not some "interesting" curved balls here!!!!

I was under the mistaken impression that an underground rail service to an airport terminal was supposed to connect to the terminal, not to some spurious location half a mile away that has no connections to the terminal worth talking about at present.

In view of the moderators problems with us using "strong" language about politicians and the like, I shall refrain from anything stronger, but I despair, whoever came up with this half baked insane concept is even more divorced from reality than the rest of the eejits that supposedly are in charge of Ireland's most successful pub!

[Just a spotter]

ARRGH!!

Well, I suppose no one is trying to sell Dublin Airport, but they are trying to sell the hotel, so why not promise to run the metro to it?

While I think of it, doesn't the terminal already have a basement that was intended to be used for a rail link? So why go the expense and engineering complexity of building a metro station under a hotel?

JAS

[MarkD]

Hopefully they don't come up with a people mover like Pearson's to link Metro with the terminal(s) - more like a rollercoaster I hear.

[mini]

Steve, very good point...

EI-RB, here's one to stir things up, under current Road Traffic Legislation (I can dig up the Act & Section if needs be) HGV's are prohibited from using the carraigeway adjacent to the central margin on Motorways, largely ignored as you may have guessed. The entrance to the Port Tunnel from the M1 will involve HGV traffic moving to these prohibitied outside lanes - leading into the tunnel and all other surface city traffic, ie faster moving cars, taxis etc moving to the inside lanes. Apart from the chaos, imagine the court case following the inevitible collision...

:sad:

[MarkD]

EI-RB

I doubt the combined brainpower of a politically appointed board like DAA could manage more than one business unit at a time. If they had a business case to keep the DUB GSH (but not under GSH name) I could understand it but the rest including the brand should be flogged. Perhaps an existing hotel group with an unexciting name (Lynch Hotels springs to mind) would go for the rather grander brand and pay a premium to acquire it.

[Shamrock 125]

Well EI-RB given that I am a civil engineer I can only say that we build what the architects and planners give us.

Rule no.1 for a civil engineer. when all goes wrong blame the architect!

[DUB-GREG]

Anyone know when construction due to start on the new 28/10 rwy at EIDW???

[A330busdriver]

About 25 years after it is required,

subject to about ten years of Environmental Impact Assessments, then

followed by another ten years of objections from the residents of Portmarnock. (All of whose houses were built after the plans for the runway were proposed).

[Mr.Brown]

A330busdriver

A330busdriver have you actually looked at the facts yet?
I agree its about 25years after its required, however most of the houses in Portmarnock were in fact built well before plans for the first 28/10 runway was planned.
There is a lot of new developments in the Portmarnock area in fact right under the current flight path however the large majority are there since the vickers days of Aerlingus.
The answer of another runway is just the cheap answer to the problem, another Airport is the solution to the problem, and think of all those people who could travel to Baldonel without having to use a toll road! Maybe thats why its not being used as a second Airport because the gov have no toll road to it yet!!!!! Dublin Airport is surrounded by toll roads.

[positive]

The second main runway as proposed by the DAA has been in the Fingal master plan for at least 30 years the present plan even allows for land to extend both the existing10/28 and the new runway.The runway will get the go ahead as the terminal 2 and extra piers are being built and also the metro is due to stop at the airport.So it looks as if all efforts are pointed at the one airport.I live a couple of miles down from the airport and most people accept the fact that the airport is going to grow with more traffic both air and road.All the residents in Portmarnock can hope for is better noise levels from newer aircraft and better flight paths.

[kopbhoy2]

.
Dublin Airport is surrounded by toll roads.

Where? The M50 (Westlink) toll is nearby but where else are these toll roads that surround the airport? I pass it everyday & the only tolled road I deal with is the M50.

[Just a spotter]

Oddly enough ...

the State currently owns a second facility with Motorway access AND near by rail link ... no not Baldonnel (no rail link) but Gormanstown (EIGM), which is currently not used. OK, the main runway is short (but could be extended, just look at Weston, and yes I know the 'extension' is currently not 'runway'). :hmm:

No wait, sorry it's a non runner, the government party Finna Fail has promised to give the land to their buddies in the property development sector to build houses. :rolleyes:

Oh well

JAS

[apaddyinuk]

They need a new airport for Dublin?? Are you mad???

The space around the current site is fine. Its only 6miles from the city center. The only tolls I can think of are for the M25 Toll Bridge, THe M1 way up past Drogheda and when the Dublin Port Tunnel opens. I live in Malahide, my house will be very much effected by the new runway yet very few people in my area are kicking up a fuss. After all, the airport was there long before most of us were.

All they really need to do with dublin airport is blow up the terminal and start all over with a nice swanky design.

[michaelknight]

Mr. Brown,

I don't think devloping Baldonnel into an international airport is the solution to the NIMBY problem, just look at the problems Weston has run into in the past few years.

Now just super impose Dublin airport's opeartion flying all over Baldonnel and I'd say you would have a few complaints!

True Dublin could do with a 'new' airport, but I don't see anything wrong with it's current location. So with a new airport will come a new runway and terminals, I don't see a runway as being a 'cheap' solution to the problem, and I don't think 3000x45M worth of concrete will be cheap!

MK

[Mr.Brown]

Anyone coming from the North and the West nearly all have to pay a toll just to get to the airport at the moment.
Another Airport at Baldonel would allow the massive market from the midlands much easier access and would be an ideal location for a main cargo terrminal in the Dublin region.
Unfortunatley another runway is on the way no matter how much people(including my self) give out about it, If the Gov want it they'll get it. Just like the Nice treaty!
It seems to be the cheaper solution to build another runway not a cheap solution. Like everything in Ireland it's half arsed! They build the M50 to help congestion in the centre of Dublin and to ease the movement of people from one side of the city to the other, but the cheap way was to build it with two lanes either side. Yeh everyone is happy. Now its as congested as the city centre. Why not initially build it with 3 lanes in the first place?
We need a bit more foresight fom our gov!
Before the land, for the new plans @ Dublin Airport, was sold I ask who owned it? Some of our local politicians maybe!
Another scam infront of our eyes!
Eircom used to be a state company, I know lets sell it to the taxpayers and overvalue the shares!
Scam after scam

[kopbhoy2]

Mr. Brown - do you honestly believe that if a new airport was developed at Baldonnel that there wouldn't be a toll road to get to it from the North or West? Toll roads appear to be the future in Ireland, whether we like it or not.

I'd like to see Baldonnell opened as a commercial airport, but i believe the Air Corps don't want to leave it or share it.

A new airport on a green field site would involve massive construction of more roads, rail links etc., & would increase journey times for the majority of people who currently use DUB. I don't want to travel to (for example) Mullingar or Athlone to catch a flight to London. Even if it is €0.01 e/w + tax ;)

[A330busdriver]

Mr Brown,

the DAP development plan is over thirty years old. The area to the north of Malahide Golf course, and the green belt which was built on some fifteen to twenty years ago - Dal Riada etc is directly under the proposed appraoch path as far as I recall.

Part of the solution to the M50 would be the removal of the toll plaza which generates such lenghty delays daily.

Perhaps the real scam that you should be crowing about is the manner in which the County master plan was ignored when some of these housing estates in the green belt were approved.

[DW11]

.
A330busdriver have you actually looked at the facts yet?
I agree its about 25years after its required, however most of the houses in Portmarnock were in fact built well before plans for the first 28/10 runway was planned.
There is a lot of new developments in the Portmarnock area in fact right under the current flight path however the large majority are there since the vickers days of Aerlingus.
The answer of another runway is just the cheap answer to the problem, another Airport is the solution to the problem, and think of all those people who could travel to Baldonel without having to use a toll road! Maybe thats why its not being used as a second Airport because the gov have no toll road to it yet!!!!! Dublin Airport is surrounded by toll roads.

I remember the new east-west runway being talked about around Baldoyle and Portmarnock in the early 70's, around the same time as the Viscounts were sitting in Penguin Alley and Martello and other estates were being built in Portmarnock. Maybe the people who moved into the new houses didn't know about the planned runway, but the locals sure did.

[DrKev]

I lived for 25 years around the southern 'village' area of Portmarnock, the end closest to the current 28 approach, about 1.5km north of the current 28 outer marker. The noise levels are not an issue in my opinion. When it is noisy is when 10 is in use and the aircraft are taking off over Portmarnock. Even so, noise at the north end of Portmarnock (the most built up area and 2-3km further north) is considerably less and of very little concern at all.

It would seem to me that the sensible thing to do under normal conditions is make approaches on the current runway, which will be 28L/10R and take offs from the new northern runway, which will take the departing traffic out further to the north and thus further away from urban areas. More traffic movements perhaps but no increase in noise over Portmarnock.

With an easterly wind, using the current runway for take off (which would then be 10R) will bring the departing aircraft between the southern (less built up) side of Portmarnock and Baldoyle. Approaching aircraft to 10L will again be further to the north than the current approach path thus lessening noise for residents west and southwest of the airfield.

End result, more arrivals or departures for Portmarnock residents but noise from any particular aircraft will be the same levels they currently are. In terms of all the residents in the vicinity of the airfield there would be a reduction in the total noise levels.

Glad I don't live there anymore. Many of those local residents groups made me :ugh: and :yuk:

[DW11]

Glad I don't live there anymore. Many of those local residents groups made me :ugh: and :yuk:

Maybe they'd be more understanding if they'd lived in Swords or Coolock in the days of Tridents and 1-11's.

[captainpaddy]

Just looking at DrKevs post.

I too lived in Portmarnock for most of my life. Noise was not an issue and we are talking about the days of BAC 1-11's and 737-200's etc, etc. When the last Ryanair 200 completed it's final flight, the noise problems, of which Portmarnock residents have ranted on about for so long, disappeared.

I can't blame the Portmarnock people for giving out though. Now that the Velvet Strand has more or less washed away, there's not much else to do!!

[DrKev]

Maybe they'd be more understanding if they'd lived in Swords or Coolock in the days of Tridents and 1-11's.

Hell, I'd wager that the reverse thrust on the tridents (and 1-11s) was noisier listening FROM Portmarnock than the current aircraft approaching! Sometimes the house would actually rumble and that was, what, 6km away? Of course there is still the odd Tupolev and Ilyushin flying in but that's about as bad as it gets nowadays.

[akerosid]

Just a few points that come to mind:

Positive, you mentioned that there is provision for an extension of the current 10/28; although there's no interest in doing that by the DAA (they'll need to be told to do so), does the fact that it's included in the "plan" mean that the planning process will be quicker, i.e. no EIS? (The likelihood is, of course, that 10/28 will remain at its current length despite the need for new long haul flights/cargo routes.)

The Fingal CC plan provides for a new terminal complex between what will be the two runways; however, current plans call for the Metro to serve the "old" (i.e. current) complex. Hopefully, someone will be done in due course to make sure this happens.

The one thing that the DAA/govt should have learned from the current debacle is that planning needs to be initiated a long time in advance; that the new T2 was revealed as insufficient SIX MONTHS after completion is unacceptable. However, what action has been taken to initiate the tendering process? None, as far as I can see.

[RogerIrrelevant69]

Has the Indo lost the plot or it's marbles (from today's issue):

New routes will add to Dublin Airport chaos

CHAOTIC scenes at Dublin Airport will worsen dramatically with up to 3m extra passengers set to pass through its single terminal next year.

Commuters face further nightmare queues and delays after Ryanair announced 12 new routes from Dublin.

They will begin from December to February. The news comes a day after the Dublin Airport Authority admitted that passengers already face delays until 2009 at the earliest.

Jeez, of the 12 routes anounced 2 are daily and the rest average 3 a week so let's say an average of 7 new flights a day which is just under 1m extra passengers if every seat was sold. Hardly a crisis attributable to Ryanair.

Come on Indo, that's a bit crap.

[fernytickles]

"passengers already face delays until 2009"

Holy smokes, 3 years delay? That must be a record?

[INLAK]

I gave up reading the Indo the day their headline spelt Aer Lingus as "Air Lingus".

[FlyingV]

The Irish Independent is complete and utter tabloid ****e from cover to cover.

[akerosid]

"passengers already face delays until 2009"
Holy smokes, 3 years delay? That must be a record?

And the worst part of it is that when that new terminal opens up, it will already be too little too late (cliched term, I know); they argue about the precise size of the terminal, but the important fact is that it has only one pier - only side of which can handle widebodies (the net gain of w/b stands being only 2 or 3, because they also lose the Pier C w/b stands). Can a single pier handle 15m pax per annum.

The really annoying thing is that FF are probably waiting until after the next election to dump the deal they did with the PDs over the future operation of DUB. If they had any sense or interest in aviation policy, they would have started planning/tendering for T3 (and ensuring that the metro line can serve it). That new terminal needs to be open around 2012. If they learn only one lesson, it should be that air transport capacity needs to be planned YEARS in advance. The current govt has shown that it's unwilling to take any pro-active measures in aviation and needs to be pitchforked into doing anything positive. I certainly hope aviation and the state of DUB will be an issue at the next election.

[kopbhoy2]

I certainly hope aviation and the state of DUB will be an issue at the next election.

Sadly the only issue regarding DUB in the next election campaign may be the proposed 10L/28R (or rather the opposition to it). The more 'common sense' issues tend to get ignored. :rolleyes:

[DrKev]

kopbhoy2

Exactly. Win votes by siding with those who shout loudest, for there in lies the publicity. :sad:

[Charlie Roy]

When will the new basement RYANAIR check-in area be opening in Dublin Airport?

When Ryanair move down there, congestion in the Departures will be reduced significantly... :ok:

Better congested than empty in any case :cool:

[Just a spotter]

Yes

great planning all round ... the terminal basement, originally intended to be the underground rail station... you can see the meeting that decided on that one now

DAA Manager 1, "We don't have enough check in space ... what should we do ...?"

DAA Manager 2, "We could plonk them on top of the short term car park!"

DAA Manager 3, "Dont be silly, think of the car parking revenue we'd loose, look at all those lovely spaces!"

DAA Manager 1, "How about we build a new terminal?"

DAA Manager 2, "It'll take too long, there's bound to be some planning objections and that'll just be from Ryanair!"

DAA Manager 3, "We could knock down his hangar to build the terminal!"

DAA Manager 2, "Why don't we put the new checkin desks in the basement!"

DAA Manager 1, "BRILLIANT!"

DAA Manager 3, "But isn't the Metro link supposed to go in there?! Where'll we put the rail link!"

Managers in unison, "Under the hotel! Think of the extra revenue of selling the hotel with it's own rail link!!"

Nah ... couldn't have happened like that ... could it?

JAS

[FlyingV]

great planning all round ... the terminal basement, originally intended to be the underground rail station... you can see the meeting that decided on that one now

The basement was NEVER intended to be a train station. I've no idea where that rumour came from - I think it might just have been nicknamed the train station and that became accepted knowledge. But it was always just a basement.

[Faire d'income]

Jeez, of the 12 routes anounced 2 are daily and the rest average 3 a week so let's say an average of 7 new flights a day which is just under 1m extra passengers if every seat was sold.

RogerIrrelevant, O'Leary boasted that this announcement would create an extra 200 jobs in Dublin. If we assume that FR carry 40 million pax this year surely then they should have 8000 staff. Likewise if we assume 200 staff for every 3 aircraft then 110 aircraft would add up to 7,400 staff. He claims to have less than 3000 staff however so that doesn't quite add up.

For the 3 aircraft involved lets say 4.5 crews each which gives 27 pilots. I would be amazed if they needed more than 50 CC. It is hard to imagine he needs 120 others staff considering the operation he already has in Dublin.

As usual nothing really adds up. :rolleyes:

[Charlie Roy]

Faire d'income

When Ryanair refer to the number of jobs new routes will create it is in reference also to all the indirect jobs created: bus drivers, cleaners, caterers, airtraffic controllers :}, and I dunno what else ;)

[Just a spotter]

The basement was NEVER intended to be a train station. I've no idea where that rumour came from - I think it might just have been nicknamed the train station and that became accepted knowledge. But it was always just a basement.

Hi FlyingV

Maybe this is the source of the confusion "The two story basement has, naturally enough, always been there. Collier says that it was originally designed to be a concourse area for a rail or Metro link from Dublin city."

The Collier here being Declan Collier, Chief Exec of the DAA. The interview is at the bottom of the page.

http://www.ihf.ie/news/innsight/05-12inn/page5-8.htm

JAS

[Camel Killer]

Faire d'income

When Ryanair refer to the number of jobs new routes will create it is in reference also to all the indirect jobs created: bus drivers, cleaners, caterers, airtraffic controllers :}, and I dunno what else ;)

I do - lawyers!!!

Or prison warders for Comical Eddie, the perjuror? :E

[840]

Details on the second terminal are apparently to be released this afternoon.

http://breaking.tcm.ie/2006/08/30/story274561.html

[Just a spotter]

T2 has been designed by a project team comprising Arup, Pascall + Watson and Mace. The consortium was appointed as project manager and designer for T2, Pier E and all associated integration works earlier this year. The firms have previously worked on other major airport projects such as Heathrow’s Terminal 5, Beijing’s new Terminal 3, Hong Kong’s Chek Lap Kok International Airport and Seeb International Airport in Oman.

http://www.dublinairport.com/about-us/media-centre/press-releases/T2_DAA.html

[Sky_Captain]

Hey Guys,

Just wondered what everyone thinks of the plans for the new T2?
Having worked in Dublin airport in the past, I think there building it in the wrong place. The plans show it to replace the "C Pier" which was only officially opened in June 1998. So why are they replacing the newest terminal to make way for the NEW newest terminal?

Oh yeah, does anybody know how much it cost to build the C Pier? Just curious :D

S.C. :ok:

[akerosid]

I can't remember the cost of it, S.C, but it's actually worse than that, because although C was opened in '98, that was only the first 3 gates; the last three followed quite a bit later.

The thing is that although there will be 8 w/b or 19 n/b stands at Pier E, the NET gain of stands - particularly for w/b aircraft will actually be quite low; the Pier C stands will be lost AND the midfield stands, where cargo acft park and A330s and various other types park, will be lost; that's ten stands. What is going to be done about widebody parking; it seems odd that at a time when DUB is facing the prospect of long haul growth, the net gain of stands is actually a loss?

Also, interestingly, the cost of EUR400m has been put about, BUT that's only for the terminal; the total price, for the terminal and Pier E, is just over EUR600m!

Nothing yet about the tendering process for the new terminal; the DAA hasn't said anything - not surprisingly and since the PDs are more interested in buses now, their minds are elsewhere and of course, the FFers having been pushed into the whole concept of tendering the operating side, won't be saying a word either.

[EI896]

The cost of the new terminal in Dublin is pheonomenal, I thought that the one in Cork was bad but this will be just too much now EUR660 million has to come out of nowhere the cost of the one in Cork nobody know where the money is going to come from? The DAA are saying the CAA should pay and visa-versa, but the new market that EIDW should be targeting is Asia and the Middle East, but the problem is getting airlines that want to operate in, ANA or Cathay Paific for Asia, EL Al maybe for the Middle East but with all the trouble going on at the moment there, Emirates are apparently trying to get in there but with Aer Lingus holding the route at the moment it's hard for Emirates to get in for some reason?

[akerosid]

And don't forget we haven't heard from MO'L yet, who is of course going to be very happy at the prospect of the airport charges going up to 7.50 per pax, for a terminal he won't even be using.

And as for long haul pax (let alone cargo) flights, forget it; airlines are investing billons in (ultra) long haul aircraft; they're not going to fly to an airport like DUB which restricts their ability to use these to their optimum efficiency - 8,650' is simply too short for a nonstop flight to Singapore, or for cargo 744Fs to operate with a decent load. At the end of the day, what it all comes down to is that the DAA gets far too much of a free hand at Dublin Airport; if the government claims that DUB is part of the state's critical infrastructure, let them impose a plan on the DAA.

That the leading airport in a country like ours, so reliant on air transport and exports, has seen air cargo growth flatline and no apparent intention to invest in new cargo facilities is a disgrace. The interest is obviously not there on the DAA's part, but worse still, it's not there at govt level.

[Charlie Roy]

Today's Sunday Business post:

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS%20FEATURES-qqqs=news-qqqid=16924-qqqx=1.asp

[akerosid]

Still working on the €400m figure here. Was this something that the DAA put out initially; in fairness to them, they do refer to the full cost in their report, although it is hidden in page 30 or so of a 36 plage splurge (on the DAA site).

You can almost see what happens next; the DAA will put a request in to the Regulator for a cost increase, the Regulator will politely say that they need more info and the DAA will throw a hissy fit.

I think, realistically, an international operator would much rather focus on the new Terminal 3, for which Fingal CC has already put plans in place, rather than a design which its competition has already commissioned. Ultimately, the best outcome would be to have a level playing field. The problem with having an independent operator for T2 is that there won't be that level playing field, because the DAA is responsible for airfield maintenance, security, fire services (nearly wrote dire services there - what a freudian slip! ;)) etc. Why not confine the DAA to the regulatory side of operating an airport and then, the operation of the two terminal could be put out to tender, either individually or (preferably) as a unit; there could then be a competition for the operation of T3 and you would have competition between them; this could be made to work - terminal operators would focus on what they should be doing - planning and building terminals and providing services to the traveller, while touting for new business, while the DAA is focused on its role.

[Sky_Captain]

A perfectly plausible idea Akerosid, it's just a shame that great idea's like those are what our goverment never seem to go for :ugh:

I'm still trying to put a price on what the final cost will be on a new terminal (T2), Pied D (which construction has started on and will probably soon be called "pier C" since that will be demolished!!!), Pie E, an over-laying of Rwy 11/29 to make it into the new parallel 10/28 and an underground metro station (who's construction will probably end up being too small for the trains :p ) I just don't think the estimate of €1.2 Billion from the DAA is reasonable?

Reading todays news papers I see their reporting on how FF promise reducing tax rates and doing a lot for the elderly could buy them the elction coming up. So how are they going to pay for all this work? I can't see O'Leary saying he will be willing to take on the increaded fee's.

I'm no economist nor much a man of commerce, but without private involvement, how are we meant to pay for all this?

S.C. :confused:

[Flame]

sky_captain....From viewing the plans for the new pier D, I can not see anything to show that Pier C will be demolished. Looks like Pier D will sit snugly into Pier C as it is now.

As for the new Pier D under construction, there is a picture of it here ..

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=527071

It appears to be running right beside the Temporary extension to pier A currently being used

[apaddyinuk]

So whats happening to Corballis House. I cant really tell from the presentation if its still there or not!

[akerosid]

Interesting to note today that FR has announced new routes ex-Dublin, including Malta, Stockholm and "the Canary Islands" (not tying themselves to any particular one!). I'm surprised because I thought MO'L would have wanted clarification on the whole fees thing before they committed to any more expansion.

Maybe, as you suggest towards the end of your post, EI-RB, the time has now come to bring in outside investors, if the DAA can't raise the funds. I still think there is something fundamentally dishonest and deliberately misleading about splitting the cost of the pier and terminal; why do they have to do this? I can't think of anywhere else that these are separated, can anyone else? What's the point - why not say straight out that the terminal includes the Pier cost and that's EUR 600m.

We're now getting towards election time and FF is having a "think in" this weekend, to come up with new policies. I think it's important that the fiasco that is Dublin Airport is brought to and kept at the forefront, because really, it's an embarrassment. Fundamentally, the govt - while conceding that DUB is part of the state's critical infrastructure, has completely failed to maintain control over the DAA and ensure that it provides the required infrastructure. Unfortunately, the big stick approach is needed, hence my proposal above about confining the DAA to the regulatory aspects of running an airport.

[Sky_Captain]

Sorry for the confusion Flame, I didn't mean they were demolishing the C Pier for the D Pier. the C Pier is the site of the new Terminal two. It looks like part of the C pier will be kept but some of it will be incorporated into the new terminal. Looking at the plans it also seems they will need to demolish Ryanairs hangar! I wonder if they will complain, even if they don't own it?

S.C.

[Charlie Roy]

I'm surprised because I thought MO'L would have wanted clarification on the whole fees thing before they committed to any more expansion.

Maybe his priority is to undermine and show up Aerlingus before their privatisation.

[Provance]

Charlie Roy

I think thats exactly what FR are trying to do .................. and it disgusts me, but business is business

[i_need_cider]

Looking at the plans it also seems they will need to demolish Ryanairs hangar! I wonder if they will complain, even if they don't own it?
S.C.
If you take a close look at the virtual tours in the DAA link a few post's above there is a building to the left of T2 that looks a lot like Ryanair's hanger :ooh: . Also i have heard that corballis house is to be moved to a new location as it is a listed building

[Sumatra]

"So whats happening to Corballis House"

Think its going to be taken down piece by piece transported and reassembled in Bunratty folk park! (didn't they do that with a few cottages in Shannon)

[akerosid]

I appreciate that it has to be moved, but to Clare? It's just not right; I mean, the very name Corballis House ties it to where it is. (I tried to look up the geneology on the Internet, but didn't get too far), but having it in Clare just didn't seem to make sense.

[Just a spotter]

Couldn't they just use it as a check-in area ... or maybe the new Metro stop, or perhaps EI's new low cost head office when they move out of the current one? :\ :8 :p :}

JAS

[akerosid]

DAA CEO Declan Collier has a piece in today's Irish Times, trying to refute allegations and criticism made of the DAA.

- He still refers to the €395m terminal (i.e. the cost of the terminal, less Pier E); I still don't understand why they cannot refer to both the terminal and Pier E?

- Once the terminal is built, there will be a possibility of an extra 15,000 sq. metres, before Terminal 3 is brought on line.

- There will be an extra €300m of spending on T1, before T2 is in operation. (Does this include Pier D?)

No mention of cargo developments, runway extension, Pier E ...

[positive]

The 300 million does include the new pier D and the T1 extension according to the article

[akerosid]

Just caught this projection by Boeing of Air Cargo developments generally, including specific markets such as Europe Asia, which is supposed to see growth of nearly 7% over the next 20 years or so.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/news/2006/q3/060913c_nr.html

I've been trying to ascertain for some time whether there are any plans for air cargo development at DUB and there doesn't seem to be any; the new terminal/pier will eat into parking stands used by cargo acft at present, the runway is shorter than it should be and there seems to be little or no interest at government level. While pax traffic has mushroomed over the last 5-10 years, cargo traffic has pretty much flatlined. Asian carriers have spent billions on 747 freighters over the last few years (with more to come, no doubtr, but with one exception - SIA - we seem to be getting none of this, especially from north Asian markets).

What amazes me particularly is that while the govt pushes trade links with India, China and other major markets (and also, incidentally, while Dublin Port is experiencing capacity problems), there is no apparent pressure on the DAA to do anything about this. Does anyone know if they actually have plans to develop cargo facilities at DUB?

[johnrizzo2000]

Cargo at Dublin? What for? Irish people dont need cargo facilities, adequate passenger facilities, or even room to breath inside Dublin Airport at peak times!! :ugh:

[Flame]

Looks like the building work at Pier D is moving ahead very quickly, its starting to take shape as can be seen here ..

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=532569

[fanatic1]

Does seem to look good alright, nice to see the sea of aircraft.

Wish cork was like that (although it is getting extremely busy) :ugh:

Thanks Guys.

[akerosid]

I was just wondering about the effect of a change in the Irish/US bilateral regulations, next month (if the EU doesn't obstruct it), which would allow the ratio of flights to change from the current 1:1 to 3:1. US carriers are probably waiting to see how things pan out, before planning for capacity next year; I'd expect most existing SNN flights to survive (after all, they'll need to if they want flights to DUB), BUT they'd look pretty silly if they had only one DUB flight for each to SNN, when they could have three.

Leaving aside EI, let's look at the Americans:
CO Second EWR made nonstop; daily to IAH.
DL CVG, BOS?
(It'll be interesting to see where they'll be sending those 757s they're allegedly converting to ETOPS)
US CLT, possibly second to PHL (although they have a shortage of acft)
AA JFK? BOS? MIA/DFW
(This will be an interesting one; I'm guessing that although EI is no longer in oneworld, they'll come to an agreement with AA, since feed through these major AA hubs will be vital)
NW If they last that long ... can't see what else they can do? MEM or MSP seem unlikely?
UA Will probably wait until stopover is completely gone, although they do have ETOPS 757s, which they could send to SNN and then do DUB-SFO, IAD, ORD?

So, certainly a double edged sword for EI, BUT for numbers, a big boost for DUB (and let's not think of where the DAA is going to put all of these aircraft!!!), but from the point of view of making an application to the EU Commission, that's a hell of a lot of new capacity and for the EU to say NO to this would certainly cause a lot of political problems - particularly if the EU wants to rescusitate the Constitution ...

Don't forget that the EU used Competition Law as the grounds to take action against Germany a few years back, leading to the decision which allowed the EU to take negotiating power into its own hands, so to use that power now to maintain a competitive disadvantage would be hypocritical in the extreme.

[johnrizzo2000]

CO to DUB-EWR will probably go 2 daily. IAH is a very longshot, due to their lack of aircraft, and they could use the aircraft needed for that route on another route, most likely to Asia. SNN-EWR will also stay. However, who knows what will happen; 737's? 757's? daily? who knows?

AA will probably stay daily/ 5weekly (winter) DUB-ORD, and probably seasonal BOS-SNN

DL will probably go daily DUB-ATL, and I dont know what the loads are like for DUB-SNN-JFK. The SNN-ATL apparently isnt performing that well

US Airways will probably go year round DUB-PHL, and seasonal SNN-PHL

NW to Detroit is interesting. Its a long flight for a 757, and they havent go the best of reputation in the states! We'll see what happens with them!

[Rallye EI-BFP]

You would find that SNN-ATL is actually doing very well. They put a B764 on SNN-ATL but only a B763 on DUB-ATL.

The loads are too low on the US Airways services to be operated year round from either airport.

[Unionjet28]

Wish that were the case Rally, but insiders at DL have pointed to overall disappointment with the loads on the SNN-ATL. Of the "new routes" (i.e since they de-linked it from the DUB service) it has been one of the disappointments.

The 764 was scheduled on the route, possibly in expection of higher loadings. It has harder to switch aircraft to match capacity to demand mid way through a flying season than you would think!

Hopefully next year brings better things for the service! One would assume it is back to a single shared DUB-SNN-ATL for the winter?

[akerosid]

I think the main reason they put a 763 to DUB and a 764 to SNN is that the 764 is still in "domestic" configuration, with a domestic first class and this is why, like AC, this is sold as an all-Y class flight. DUB would have a strong Business Class market and J class pax would more than likely not accept this product.

I see Michael Broughton, BA's chairman, is quoted in today's Indo as saying Open Skies might be as much as seven years away. Of course, you have to acknowledge that BA has a vested interest in Open Skies NOT happening - despite whatever else he says - because that will mean they'll lose the stranglehold on LHR. So, BA is more than happy with the current situation; as long as they can get the Americans and British squabbling away for a few years, they're happy to let them - and throw spanners in the works if they look like they might be close to agreement.

From an Irish perspective, the prospect of another seven years of the SNN stopover is simply not an option; either the EU will give us the green light to go ahead with a new bilateral with the US, or the govt should look at the possibility of opting out of the process altogether. When the EU took over negotiating rights with the US, never was it anticipated that something as peripheral as US airline ownership - irrelevant to most EU carriers - would be the sticking point.

[StephenM_SMC]

You would find that SNN-ATL is actually doing very well. They put a B764 on SNN-ATL but only a B763 on DUB-ATL.
The loads are too low on the US Airways services to be operated year round from either airport.

I've flown twice this summer on US Airways PHL-DUB, full loads...

[akerosid]

Ryanair has - surprise, surprise - objected to the plans to the airport's terminal 2 and has offered to build a cheaper terminal with higher pax capacity.

In fairness, one can understand FR's frustration, in that they'll face a higher pax service charge, but not benefit from the new facilities. That said, there is a measure of obstructionism for the sake of it, given that FR wants to make life as uncomfortable as possible for EI at DUB and delaying a terminal will obviously help in that.

It would be interesting to see the full extent of MO'L's proposals and the grounds of objections; I'm still amazed that no one has blown the whistle on the DAA's attempts to separate the cost of the terminal from that of Pier E.

[johnrizzo2000]

US airways flights from Dublin have been selling really well all summer. They have been regularly oversold, and with talks of EI interested in flying to PHL, I think US could manage year round DUB-PHL

[asianfly]

Following on from Askeroid's post above, here is an article from today's Irish Independent which sheds some more light on the issue of Ryanair's objections to the new terminal. Incidentally, I love the third last paragraph where the following quote appears: "Dublin Airport is also the second most efficient airport in a peer group of 25 European airports, in terms of ratio of costs to passenger numbers." :eek: yeah, right!


Gloves off in battle on DAA airport terminal
by Tom McEnaney

RYANAIR ended a nine-month detente with Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) yesterday when it outlined plans to vigorously oppose DAA's plans for a second terminal at Dublin Airport.

"You can't trust DAA to build an efficient, low-cost terminal," Mr O'Leary said, calling the planned terminal "badly designed, in the wrong location, (and) is five times more expensive than other similar terminal facilities in the UK and Europe".

Mr O'Leary has for many years been a very vocal thorn in DAA's side, but last year after DAA came under new management the Ryanair chief executive laid his problems with the authority aside and said he would support plans for the new terminal.

To mark the announcement, which was made in the days before Christmas of last year, he dressed in a Santa Claus outfit and posed for photographers with a piece of cake labelled 'humble pie'.

The only props at yesterday's press conference were two over-head projectors used to detail what Ryanair sees as the deficiencies in DAA's plans for the new terminal.

Mr O'Leary has also dusted off the airline's own plans for a new terminal, which he said would cost €250m.

There were few details on the Ryanair proposal which Mr O'Leary wants to see built to the north of the airport adjacent to Pier D, which is almost exclusively used by Ryanair. The site for the Ryanair proposal is currently occupied by hangar buildings owned by DAA.

Mr O'Leary's comments were timely, coming on the first day of the Bord Pleanála hearing into DAA's planning application for the new terminal.

Industry sources pointed out that Mr O'Leary's comments may also have been timed to damage Aer Lingus, the expected occupant of the new terminal, which is due to publish its flotation price.

DAA's rejected the accusations. It said: "The maximum airport charge at Dublin Airport, at just over €6 per passenger, is the lowest of any major airport in Europe.

"Nonetheless, according to an analysis carried out for the Aviation Regulator in 2005, Dublin Airport is also the second most efficient airport in a peer group of 25 European airports, in terms of ratio of costs to passenger numbers."

Mr O'Leary said that DAA's plans for a second terminal would cost €700m. DAA said the cost would only be €400m.

Included in the Ryanair's estimate of the cost is €150m write-off on Pier C, which it said "they (DAA) now propose to scrap altogether. DAA said the Pier C cost only €60m and more than half of it will be incorporated in the new terminal. Mr O'Leary said he object to An Bord Pleanála, the Commission for Aviation Regulation, the Competition Authority and the European Commission.

[akerosid]

Continuation of: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=200552&page=13

Clearly, the DAA is trying to shoe-horn this terminal into the lands it owns at DUB; it considered the area of the old EI hangars, but came to the conclusion that the cost (and time involved) of cleaning up the area would be prohibitive. This new area, although small, was all that's available; don't forget that the area on the other side of the airport is owned by other people, such as the McEvaddys, who want to build a terminal themselves; they do have a 50 acre site, but whether that is good enough is unclear.

I personally think that the big issue here is government oversight; the govt has said in the past that DUB is part of the state's critical infrastructure, yet it has repeatedly allowed the DAA to have its head; the DAA has done nothing on cargo capacity, runway length and the govt has itself been obstructive and disinterested in opening the airport to competition, something which I believe needs to happen.

Next Summer will be a very busy one as far as t/a traffic is concerned. The govt is expected to be successful in getting EU approval to expand t/a flights, based on the US/Irish agreement of last November and this will allow t/a airlines operating from SNN to treble the number of flights they operate from DUB (i.e. they must be operating from SNN to avail of this); there is another factor too, very much to DUB's benefit, which is that under an agreement reached last week, Irish-US flights will arrive into domestic gates at US airports, which will make it a lot easier to connect and this should make DUB a much more popular connection point. The big Achilles Heel: Dublin Airport.

With the construction of the new pier and terminal, the airport is losing widebody parking stands and is the existing Pier B big enough (particularly the area currently used by US Immigration) to handle the expected significant passenger influx/throughput. The current airside connection channel is barely big enough for two people to pass, side by side - that needs to be worked on.

I don't want to be seen as complaining gratuitously, but clearly, nothing is going to happen as long as FF is in charge of aviation policy; they simply will not apply the metaphorical pitchfork with anything like enough determination.

Ultimately, what needs to happen is that the operation of both terminals needs to be by professional, experinced, independent operators and the DAA should be relegated to the regulatory side of operating an airport, for which it would get service charges/rental from the terminal operators.

[shannon55]

I completly agree with the last posting, FF have done precious little for Irish aviation.

One of the larger European Airport-terminal operators should be given the responsibility of building and/or operating it. A private company would make sure there would be no money-wasting delays. I believe this would be the case if the PD's had there way.

[Rallye EI-BFP]

Yep....back to the shared B763 DAL128/9 for the winter again.......interesting to see what next summer looks like

[shannon55]

Just wondering, Would a DUB-WAT service be feasible or is RYR's ORK-DUB service too close?:confused:

[akerosid]

Somehow I doubt it and now, as you say, ORK has the DUB service. EI Commuter operated the route many, many years ago with Shorts (and Fokkers?) and pulled out of it.

[johnrizzo2000]

I'd love to know what FR's loads are like on the Dublin to Cork. Between RE and fR theres a fair few flights per day! Domestic figures had been down a bit before FR started, so I wonder what they're like now!

[840]

Just wondering, Would a DUB-WAT service be feasible or is RYR's ORK-DUB service too close?:confused:
I would say that Waterford is simply too close to Dublin. At under 100 miles, the car or train is too fast in comparison. This is especially true when you consider that some of the large towns in Waterford's catchment - Kilkenny, Wexford - are even closer to Dublin again.

[shannon55]

Ya, thats true. It's just in a report published sometime ago into the future of the airpoprt there was some recommendations including the introduction of a link to DUB and an extension of the runway...in hindsight I guess it was published before RYR launched the ORK route.:ugh:

[dublindispatch]

:bored:Any news/gossip/etc etc around Dublin that does NOT invlove the goings on of either Aer Lingus or Ryanair, othe airlines area available!!!!:bored::bored::bored:

[EC-ILS]

Apart from DY starting OSL/CPH later this month I cant think of anything!

[dublindispatch]

but dont all the new airbridges look good in the e-pier! Malev going in October seems a done deal. Is this not the second time DY have tried routes out of Dublin? Seems very strange time of the year to start anything.

Well going by all the angels of death in the other threads, Dublin if we exclude FR and EI, remember other airlines are available lol but the list is getting shorter granted, seems to be heading towards a state of the art structure with next to no traffic, at least when the Celtic Tiger gets home from the vet and is all cured we will have a nice new underused Airport to accept all the economic migrants/immigrants in or out off!!!

[EC-ILS]

DY previously tried WAW-DUB, at the time EI, FR and C0 all had flights from DUB to WAW, CPH and OSL have a little less competition.

[Airbus321-200]

When is pier E (T2) opening??

What operations will be flying out of there?? its not going to be full of R*******s ( that airline) is it?

[apaddyinuk]

Do you honestly think Ryanair would pay to use T2???? LOL!

T2 is being built with US Customs and immigration incorporated. It will primarily be used for longhaul carriers and im sure the few quality airlines serving DUB such as WX/BD/EY/IB/LH etc. It is due to open I believe in time for the summer schedule next year however I believe Aer Lingus will not be shifting their operation to T2 until October 2010!

Hope that helps!

[Airbus321-200]

Is ireland the only place where you can clear US customs???

And does anyone have any info on what charter carriers are expected this year at DUB.

[Noxegon]

No, I've cleared US customs before in Toronto.

[EISNN]

You can clear US customs and immigration in Canada and Aruba I believe. They are the only two countries along with Ireland.

[BFS101]

Noticed this in the Belfast Telegraph should anyone be interested...


Etihad Airways is to hold an open day in Dublin this week in a bid to fill 50 positions it is creating in Abu Dhabi, the airline announced this afternoon.

The company says it chose Ireland for an open day because of the country's highly skilled and knowledge-based work force.
Etihad is seeking licensed aircraft engineers, maintenance engineers, sheet metal workers and cabin crew.
The open day will take place this Wednesday at the Burlington Hotel in Dublin


Etihad to hold Dublin open day in bid to fill 50 positions - Ireland, Breaking News - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/breaking-news/ireland/etihad-to-hold-dublin-open-day-in-bid-to-fill-50-positions-14448915.html)

[dublin_eire]

Nothing new there! Sure everyone wants a bit of the Irish :p