Toronto Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup

I'm still not buying the "busy commercial airport" comment. Let's say that Porter ultimately flies 15 round trip flights to and from Ottawa, Montreal, and other random destinations per day. That's 90 flights a day (Pearson averages over 1100). Porter currently flies from about 6:30 am to 11:00 pm. That's *gasp* one Porter flight every 11 minutes. Hardly one plane every 20-30 seconds.

I challenge the city (knowing it will fail) to turn the waterfront into something so beautiful and so successful that it can finally prove that something better can and WILL be built in the airport's place. We all know that if history repeats itself, closing the Island airport would result in a massive field of overgrown weeds for the next 30 years, at which point the city sells the land to a developer in turn for another 10 hideous condos to add to the list.

In my opinion, the Island Airport represents the only piece of waterfront property that is on track to being used to its full potential.
 
Chuck said:
I'm still not buying the "busy commercial airport" comment. Let's say that Porter ultimately flies 15 round trip flights to and from Ottawa, Montreal, and other random destinations per day. That's 90 flights a day (Pearson averages over 1100). Porter currently flies from about 6:30 am to 11:00 pm. That's *gasp* one Porter flight every 11 minutes. Hardly one plane every 20-30 seconds.
Click to expand...

Chuck,

The facts and the math are quite easy. Read carefully:

- When I refer to hearing noise 20-30 seconds per hour, I mean the sound of a Porter plane taxiing. I am not even including the noise during landings and take-offs.
- Here's the current situation:
1) Porter currently operates 4 planes. This results in 38 instances of taxiing per day (either on landing or taking off.) Check Porter's schedule on its web-site to confirm. And I am not including Halifax flights.
2) Porter has 20 planes on order. Delucci is also on record for saying he wants to order more. Let's assume then he'll eventually operate 30.
3) If he's operating 30, you will hear 285 planes taxiing each day (using the average for the current flights.)
4) This results in 20.4 instances of taxiing per hour.
5) If taxiing takes an average of 1 minute to 1.5 minutes each, then you will be hearing the sound of a plane taxiing for 20.4 minutes to 30.6 minutes each hour or 20.4 seconds to 30.6 seconds for every minute.

If you disagree with my conclusion, then tell me EXACTLY where I am wrong in the points above.
 
roch5220 said:

"Based upon what calculation? How do you calculate the 'loss' of peace and tranquility? If peace and tranquility is your benchmark, then basically all downtown deveopment would not have enough benefit to offset this. I don't know about you, but myself, and many kids as well, marvel at being able to watch planes taking off, especially at some waterfront locations, the views are amazing. And 14 MM people won't all be affected, you would have to calculate the numbers of the 14 MM that actually will be in the waterfront vicinty where the noise would material, near the airport. As you said, 95% of waterfront condo owners do not hear the planes. The noise wouldn't be evenly distributed throughout the entire waterfront."

Yes, you can't put a number on the loss of peace and tranquility as you can't on the benefit of Porter. I guess it just strikes me as obvious: we have a great airport in Pearson and having a second airport, is nowhere near enough to justify ruining the waterfront. It is as obvious as the fact that we shouldn't recommend turning High Park into a massive garbage dump just because it would be a convenient location for the trash haulers. (although I can't actually measure the loss of the enjoyment of the Park and the added stink with a calculator.)

I do very much like your point about how many people love to watch the planes. That is a very good and valid point. My guess is that the number of people that would dislike the noise would be far in excess of the ones that enjoy watching the planes. But I don't know that for sure. I could be 100% wrong there.

Of the 14 million people visiting, most will hear the planes. You can hear them from Bay Street right to Bathurst. I know this. I live on the waterfront.

One last thing: yes, peace and tranquility is my benchmark. But it is a benchmark for the waterfront only! Again, why do Torontonians make such a fuss about the waterfront? What makes the lake so attractive? It is the feeling of peace and calmness that it gives. This is why condos with water views command such a premium! Thats it! For anyone that doesn't agree with this, I have a question: Why oh why do we have all this talk about wanting to make the WATERFRONT so nice. Why the darn waterfront? What makes it so special? If the water does not bring such benefits as I describe, then it could actually be seen as a liability because you can drown in the lake! And then the talk should be of creating more barriers (like the Gardiner and condos) so that people will be kept from drowning!
 
EnviroTO said:
The best way to measure is to have a vote. This vote could be for a specific issue or simply for local representation which shares your point of view. Oh wait, didn't some mayoral candidate campaign on working hard to fight against the airport? I wonder whatever happened to that guy.
Click to expand...

Great point. Interesting....no one has tried to respond to your point yet! Hmm...wonder why?
 
luvbrka said:
Great point. Interesting....no one has tried to respond to your point yet! Hmm...wonder why?
Click to expand...

I did, sarcastically.

David Miller ran an aggressive campaign during his election to stop the construction of a bridge to the island at the foot of Bathurst Street and vowed to stop expansion of the airport. He won the election. Miller succeeding in stopping the bridge but stopping expansion of the airport proved to be a more of a hot potato than he thought. The Toronto Port Authority who runs the struggling airport fall under the jurisdiction of the Feds. who continue pouring millions of our tax dollars every year into the airport. The Port Authority stated plans to increase commercial air traffic by over 3,000% to make the airport a self sustaining enterprise.

At the west end of the city we have a multi billion dollar expansion happening at Pearson with plans for a fast rail link from downtown to Pearson so do we really need this airport at our waterfront with planes landing and taking off right above one of the cities best parklands?

As convenient a location as it may be for business people and those of us who live downtown, the island airport doesn't add any money to the economy, it simply takes it away from other airports in the region.
 
luvbrka said:
Chuck,

The facts and the math are quite easy. Read carefully:

- When I refer to hearing noise 20-30 seconds per hour, I mean the sound of a Porter plane taxiing. I am not even including the noise during landings and take-offs.
- Here's the current situation:
1) Porter currently operates 4 planes. This results in 38 instances of taxiing per day (either on landing or taking off.) Check Porter's schedule on its web-site to confirm. And I am not including Halifax flights.
2) Porter has 20 planes on order. Delucci is also on record for saying he wants to order more. Let's assume then he'll eventually operate 30.
3) If he's operating 30, you will hear 285 planes taxiing each day (using the average for the current flights.)
4) This results in 20.4 instances of taxiing per hour.
5) If taxiing takes an average of 1 minute to 1.5 minutes each, then you will be hearing the sound of a plane taxiing for 20.4 minutes to 30.6 minutes each hour or 20.4 seconds to 30.6 seconds for every minute.

If you disagree with my conclusion, then tell me EXACTLY where I am wrong in the points above.
Click to expand...

Sorry....I need to change my numbers....I just listened as a Porter plane landed and found that the result was 2 minutes of loud taxiing and a further 2 minutes of taxiing that was not so loud. So....if Porter gets up to 30 planes, then we will hear loud taxiing for 40 full minutes in 1 hour and for the remaining part of the hour we will hear light taxiing. And during the 40 full minutes of loud taxiing, for half of that time we will hear at the same time a second plane taxiing. I think that is how it would work! Anyhow, you get the point.

If Porter is highly successful, this is what the future of the watefront will be. And by the way, the management (Delucci and Don Carty) and outside investors in Porter (Borealis, Edgestone Capital, GE Asset Mgmt) are all top notch in every way. And they are doing and outstanding job (as one of our previous posts on here described) and they have a low cost operation. It has all the ingredients to be highly successful. Thus far, the initial results aren't good, but I would certainly not count these folks out.

....I guess I could move to the Beach and buy shares in Porter if they go public! And stay far, far away from the downtown waterfront! Oh, yes, and start taking Porter for all of my short-haul flights!
 
luvbrka said:
If you disagree with my conclusion, then tell me EXACTLY where I am wrong in the points above.
Click to expand...

People might not disagree with the math but not everyone's going to agree that the taxiing planes are as unbearably loud as you think they are/will be.
 
A retired aircraft mechanic family member of mine has stated that there are few louder planes when taxiing than a Dash 8. He would also point out that some small jets are quieter on takeoff and landing than Dash 8s.

Though his experience was with the 100 and 300 series Dash 8s, not the Q400s that Porter files.
 
scarberiankhatru said:
People might not disagree with the math but not everyone's going to agree that the taxiing planes are as unbearably loud as you think they are/will be.
Click to expand...

Well, I was responding to a previous post that did disagree with the math.

As I said in a previous post, during a particular lunch I had at the edge of the waterfront, I had to speak much louder to be heard by my friend when the Porter plane was taxiing. Do you think that this level of noise happening for 40 minutes of every hour would be an issue? Remember, in a conversation with someone, you'd be practically shouting for 40 minutes of the hour.

....well, I will test it out again...I should confirm that the taxiing planes are always this loud. Maybe, it was that the wind direction that caused the noise to travel that last particular time. I will report back. And before anyone says or claims that the noises aren't that bad....make sure that you witness for yourself first how loud Porter's planes are when taxiing before giving an opinion. Again, I will report my findings next week.
 
luvbrka said:
And before anyone says or claims that the noises aren't that bad....make sure that you witness for yourself first how loud Porter's planes are when taxiing before giving an opinion.
Click to expand...

I have witnessed them many times, and most of the time I don't even notice them, I just see them flying away or landing...even when I'm as close to the airport as around the Music Garden. I'm sure I could hear them if I listened, but they're nowhere near at a level that bothers me, although to some people (me excluded), hearing *any* noise is unbearable. An aircraft mechanic standing at the airport can say taxiing planes are loud, but they sure don't stay at that volume if you're standing a kilometre away, within earshot of the Gardiner and thousands of other cars, people, birds, etc. Obviously, if the noise of the planes was so loud for 40 minutes every hour that people are forced to shout, the waterfront would be a much less pleasant place. Fortunately, I think you're exaggerating.
 
"The newest member of the Dash-8 family, the Q400, had its first flight in 1998 and entered commercial service in February 2000. The Q400 Dash 8 airliner was developed by Bombardier to meet the requirements of regional airlines for larger aircraft on high-density, short-haul routes. The 350kt Q400 airliner is one of the world's quietest turboprop aircraft. The Noise and Vibration Suppression system (NVS) was introduced on the Dash 8 turboprop family in 1996."
 
I really don't see Porter's current fleet to be a major noise problem. The only concern though is if Porter does become a mainstay, and more people fly out of the island, this will attract possibly other airlines to fly out of their. You don't know what they will fly, and I don't know if you would want that airport to become congested.

However, Toronto, being the financial capital of Canada, with important links to NYC, Chicago, and Boston, a downtown commutter airport could really enhance the financial district, and make doing business in Toronto a lot easier.
 
landing is very quiet, often unnoticeable. taxing is always noticeable, though not always annoying. as a guess, it's annoying 30-40% of the time. it depends on the wind.

i've heard the tpa say more than once that the noise from the airport isn't more than the lakeshort/gardiner. while i'm sure that's true, the waterfront and waterfront stuff (parks, boardwalk, restaurants, etc.) aren't right next to the lakeshore/gardiner either. not sure about other people, but when i'm beside the lakeshore/gardiner, i always have to noticeably raise my voice in a conversation.
 
roch5220 said:
"The 350kt Q400 airliner is one of the world's quietest turboprop aircraft."
Click to expand...

Although I'll mention that I still haven't been down to the shore and experienced the noise for myself (though I have seen a very quiet takeoff), I'd just point out that this almost certainly refers to the noise level within the cabin for passengers and doesn't refer to the level of noise produced when taxiing. Just like a TV ad for a "quiet" car.
 
http://www.air-fair.org/

I don't know if this was posted here before, but there are audio comparisons to a jet, turboprop, and streetcar. I am not assuming though that they kept all parameters the same (as their is no way to tell, and that they are biased towards pro-city centre airport).

One stat that they did have that tells us why we are fighting over this issue, is that the income levels of residents around the toronto islands airport is almost double that of people surronding pearson.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top