• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Plans for second runway at Dublin Airport scrapped


Schuhart

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
4,844
Plans for second runway at Dublin Airport scrapped

No surprise. But my read of it is this leaves us with a new Terminal that we don't really need but without a longer runway that could actually have done us some good.

As Beckett would say, nothing to be done.
 

Simbo67

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
572
I think we do need the second terminal, even with the declines, the old terminal is operating well beyond its design capacity. The real question was about the runway, other airports with single runways were operating much higher flight volumes (I think Stansted was the oft-given example).
 

locke

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
3,092
If the second runway isn't to go ahead, extending the existing one must be a massive national priority. It wasn't going to be done because the new one would be long enough. Given the range restrictions it imposes, it seriously hampers our abilities to compete internationally.
 

orbit

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
701
I imagine it's just being postponed, rather than scrapped completely. The comparisons with Stansted are not really valid either (though I think it's getting a second runway as well).

I don't get the point of extending the existing one. What benefit would that bring?
 

thebig C

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
856
Well, weather its by extending the existing runway or building a new runway......they certainly need a longer one if they are ever to attract any routes to the Far East. And, thats where alot of trade will be based in the future.

Of course, Dublin would probably would have had a 3000m plus runway if it wasn't for Shannon, Dev and the good old DAA. All of whom are FF!
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
90
I imagine it's just being postponed, rather than scrapped completely. The comparisons with Stansted are not really valid either (though I think it's getting a second runway as well).

I don't get the point of extending the existing one. What benefit would that bring?
The current runway is too short. That's the issue. It's runway length, not runway capacity.

With the current runway, a flight cannot take-off to a destination as far away as Hong Kong or Singapore without severe payload restrictions. Unless of course they stop at Shannon first.
 

dmc444

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2009
Messages
193
Dublin does need a new terminal.

I have never seen an Airport check in Terminal so dis organised and cramped with people in my life. In the summer that Airport is a nightmare.

The new Terminal does like pretty impressive but i know Aer Lingus are planning to increase there long haul services next year, the are bringing back the Los Angeles route and Dubai (I think) so the extra room will needed.

As for the runway- I dont see why they are scrapping it, with growing passenger numbers i would think its only a matter of time before a new runway is needed.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
90
It's worth adding that this is a terrible reflection of the ludicrous Irish approach to planning. The excuse given is that the market doesn't warrant the extended runway right now, ignoring the fact that it will take several years to complete. So then when traffic picks up, we'll be lacking an adequate runway and airlines will take their business elsewhere. Then we'll finally start building the runway 6 years too late.
 

Schuhart

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
4,844
Dublin does need a new terminal.

I have never seen an Airport check in Terminal so dis organised and cramped with people in my life. In the summer that Airport is a nightmare.
If memory serves, questions have been raised as to whether the new Terminal (which certainly would be more comfortable than the existing one) would cost less to mothball than to run.

I've used the old terminal a lot in recent years. I agree it ain't pretty. But I've always found you can get through it reasonably quickly. Comfort would be great, but I just don't think its the priority facing us. How they managed to get 23 million passengers through such a tiny building is a bit of a marvel. But they did, and it looks like it will be a while before they see 23 million passengers again. And that's assuming environmental concerns don't lead to low fares airlines being put out of business.
The new Terminal does like pretty impressive but i know Aer Lingus are planning to increase there long haul services next year, the are bringing back the Los Angeles route and Dubai (I think) so the extra room will needed.
Can we be confident these plans are still relevant?
As for the runway- I dont see why they are scrapping it, with growing passenger numbers i would think its only a matter of time before a new runway is needed.
The issue seems to be that passenger numbers are actually declining (there's mention of this in the story I linked in the opening post.)
It's worth adding that this is a terrible reflection of the ludicrous Irish approach to planning. The excuse given is that the market doesn't warrant the extended runway right now, ignoring the fact that it will take several years to complete. So then when traffic picks up, we'll be lacking an adequate runway and airlines will take their business elsewhere. Then we'll finally start building the runway 6 years too late.
+1

That's not to say that the money is there for this - I'm assuming the DAA's assessment of where it stands commercially right now is accurate. But that means the money that could have been there has been spent elsewhere.
 

locke

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
3,092
One thing that needs to be remembered with terminals is that they're set to get smaller anyway. With the increasing prevalence of internet check-in, hand-baggage only flying etc. as many check in desks and baggage belts as there are are less likely to be needed in the future. That in turn creates space for other functions. So, it's likely that it will be possible to increase the capacity of existing terminals within their current structures. That is providing access for all the extra people, both landside and airside, can be provided.

Personally, I'd put a runway extension as a way bigger priority for Dublin than a terminal expansion.
 

dmc444

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2009
Messages
193
Oh dont get me wrong, I still think Dublin is a good airport but i still think it needs a major facelift. Tony Benn said it best, Airports are the face of the nation, it is the first and last thing a tourist will see in a country.

I think though the airport should expand, we are an Island so flying is one of 2 ways you can get out of the country.

I also think that with flight prices coming down alot of people will be booking cheap holidays also i would be surprised if we dont see a big increase in numbers of people traveling over the next 5 years.
 

cinik

Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
33
Well that's the price you pay for living and PAYING EXCREMENT LOADS OF TAX in a Banana republic
 

orbit

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
701
It's worth adding that this is a terrible reflection of the ludicrous Irish approach to planning. The excuse given is that the market doesn't warrant the extended runway right now, ignoring the fact that it will take several years to complete. So then when traffic picks up, we'll be lacking an adequate runway and airlines will take their business elsewhere. Then we'll finally start building the runway 6 years too late.
I take your point about the runway length, but it will hardly take several years to build the new one. Surely it would be built in a year or there abouts. So long as the current planning permission doesn't expire, then I would think a delay of a year or two isn't a disaster.
 

slx

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
883
Dublin definitely needs the new terminal, however, it might be prudent to hold off on the runway.

It's looking like at best traffic will stagnate at current levels and at worst will decline significantly. We could be looking at Dublin Airport returning to early 2000s levels of traffic, in which case it will still need the new terminal, but I wouldn't really think we could justify the spend on a new runway.

It should however, be planned and designed and ready to roll when / if capacity is needed in future.
 

Schuhart

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
4,844
Dublin definitely needs the new terminal, however, it might be prudent to hold off on the runway.

It's looking like at best traffic will stagnate at current levels and at worst will decline significantly. We could be looking at Dublin Airport returning to early 2000s levels of traffic, in which case it will still need the new terminal, but I wouldn't really think we could justify the spend on a new runway.

It should however, be planned and designed and ready to roll when / if capacity is needed in future.
The point about the runway is it would open up new markets - something that a terminal cannot do. A longer runway would mean that long-haul routes that are presently a physical impossibility would become feasible - so that we'd actually have more people to put in that terminal.

I suppose possibly the DAA felt the runway should come second is because they wouldn't have had the terminal space to move extra passengers through. But that's not a problem now.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
90
The point about the runway is it would open up new markets - something that a terminal cannot do. A longer runway would mean that long-haul routes that are presently a physical impossibility would become feasible - so that we'd actually have more people to put in that terminal.
Sure they can always fly to the far-east with a stopover in Shannon ;)
 
C

caveman

They should build a Dublin (South) airport down Wicklow way and connect it to the Dart. Would be perfect for the budget airlines.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
90
Aer Lingus have some A350s on order, presumably with view to flying to destinations such as Cape Town, Bangkok, Hong Kong or Singapore. If the DAA doesn't provide the infrastructure, will Aer Lingus move a large component of its long-haul fleet to the new Gatwick base? I suspect they will have no other option. The negatives of this decision go beyond shutting the door to new entrants. Could the DAA be forcing one of its biggest customers to redirect growth away from Dublin?
 
Top