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

Do those numbers take into account flights which are diverted to Pearson?
Click to expand...

I don't know. I didn't see any Porter YYZ numbers except for the one flight to PHL in April. I did combine numbers in several months where there were multiple entries for the same route (I assume the small numbers represent charter flights).

EDIT: Here is an article about Sky Regional Airlines which is starting up YTZ-YUL service soon on behalf of Air Canada. It was in today's Financial Post. http://www.financialpost.com/news/I...ine+takeoff+against+Porter/4504483/story.html

EDIT: I updated my statistics post on the previous page with ORD-YYZ numbers from the other airlines.
 
Last edited:
Porter's 70-seat planes might be a bit much for Ottawa-Thunder Bay, especially compared to Jazz's 50-seat CRJs (which I'm assuming its being dropped for not being filled). That said, a Dash-8 is more economical than a CRJ at $100/barrel oil, so maybe.
Click to expand...

Does anyone have any data on the difference in fuel burn/efficiency between the Q400 and the CRJs, Dash-8-100s and -300s? My understanding is that a Q400 burns slightly less per hour than the CRJs but also goes slightly slower.

For Ottawa-Thunder Bay, assuming the same number of passengers, would a Q400 use more or less fuel than a CRJ 200?

How do they compare to Dash-8-100s? Could you replace a busy -100 with a Q? If there are 35 passengers, I would much prefer to travel in a half-full Q400 than a full -100.
 
sjc said:
Does anyone have any data on the difference in fuel burn/efficiency between the Q400 and the CRJs, Dash-8-100s and -300s? My understanding is that a Q400 burns slightly less per hour than the CRJs but also goes slightly slower.

For Ottawa-Thunder Bay, assuming the same number of passengers, would a Q400 use more or less fuel than a CRJ 200?

How do they compare to Dash-8-100s? Could you replace a busy -100 with a Q? If there are 35 passengers, I would much prefer to travel in a half-full Q400 than a full -100.
Click to expand...

I don't have specific fuel burn numbers. But as a rough discussion...optimal fuel burn occurs at the cruising altitude....so does optimal flying speed. The cruise altitude for turboprops is significantly lower than for turbofans/turbojets. This means that a Q400 reaches its cruise altitude much faster than a CRJ. And while at cruise, turboprops burn significantly less fuel due to having (in effect) a higher bypass ratio (larger rotor area moving more air). For trips less than 500 miles, this generally means that the Q400 is only slightly slower than a CRJ but offers significant fuel burn advantages. For trips longer than 500 miles, some of that advantage is negated by RJs spending less time in the air. But generally speaking, turboprops will always win the day on fuel burn.

For your scenario, given a fixed demand, a Q400 would use less fuel than a CRJ200. But fuel is not the only consideration in the equation. Faster airplanes equate to higher utilization. If the route is busy enough, shaving off minutes, could mean an extra revenue generating trip per day. I don't think Porter is that tight though, on this route.

And all this is moot, since there's no RJs allowed (or could be accomodated) on the Island.
 
I used to know exactly how much fuel was used per flight but I can't remember for the life of me. I'll see if I can find out the answer.
 
And all this is moot, since there's no RJs allowed (or could be accomodated) on the Island.
Click to expand...

I was wondering more for the purposes of looking at existing Air Canada Jazz routes (especially within Ontario) that use Dash-8s and CRJs and whether they could support a Q400 (Jazz, Porter or otherwise).

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busi...ore+planes+from+Bombardier/4521279/story.html
Porter has ordered two more planes for delivery in December 2011 and April 2012. Good news for the employees of Bombardier and good for the economy of Toronto. This will bring the total number of Porter aircraft to 26, with options still outstanding for 4 more.
 
Last edited:
Not sure. Most of the routes within Ontario are either already served by Porter, do better on RJs, or will probably see Dash 8s once Jazz takes delivery of the Q400s they have on order (Toronto-Thunder Bay comes to mind). The routes that aren't served by Porter might not need that much capacity, like Ottawa-London and do better with a couple of daily flights versus one flight on a larger plane.

It's kind of a shame that Bombardier canned the Q200 and Q300 airplanes. While they weren't hot sellers, it means that original Dash 8-1/300s have almost no direct replacement (only the ATR 42 remains) and routes like Ottawa-London, Ottawa-Québec, Ottawa-Montréal and Montréal-Québec might not need as much capacity as the Q400 can give, even with its lower operating costs. And I imagine Jazz will be in the market for replacements of the 60+ strong fleet of Dash 8-1/300s in the next 5-10 years.
 
The TPA is moving forward on building some sound barriers and an engine-run up area. The barriers will be 8 metres high, one facing the harbor and one facing the Western Channel. The run-up area will be on the far side of the airport, near the beach.

http://www.torontoport.com/notices/...CPA EA Project Description - Final Mar 28.pdf

http://www.aviation.ca/content/view/9758/117/
The EA timetable includes community consultation on the project description, a review period of the draft report, and a public meeting, provisionally for the week of May 9. The final EA report is due in early June, whereafter the Port Authority would – pending the results of the EA – begin construction.
Click to expand...
 
erikyow said:
Not sure. Most of the routes within Ontario are either already served by Porter, do better on RJs, or will probably see Dash 8s once Jazz takes delivery of the Q400s they have on order (Toronto-Thunder Bay comes to mind). The routes that aren't served by Porter might not need that much capacity, like Ottawa-London and do better with a couple of daily flights versus one flight on a larger plane.

It's kind of a shame that Bombardier canned the Q200 and Q300 airplanes. While they weren't hot sellers, it means that original Dash 8-1/300s have almost no direct replacement (only the ATR 42 remains) and routes like Ottawa-London, Ottawa-Québec, Ottawa-Montréal and Montréal-Québec might not need as much capacity as the Q400 can give, even with its lower operating costs. And I imagine Jazz will be in the market for replacements of the 60+ strong fleet of Dash 8-1/300s in the next 5-10 years.
Click to expand...

I'm somewhat surprised there aren't already Dash 8 100 replacements down the pipe yet, after my terrible luck with aircraft on the departing and return trip from YYZ to BWI.
 
How much is the price difference between Q300s and Q400s? You could probably replace most Q300 routes with Q400s.

The question remains as to whether it would be economical to replace -100s with Q400s, even if you are going to end up running them less than half full. If they were to do this, I wonder if it would be worthwhile to take 20-30 seats out and give everyone more room (and lower the weight).

In the short/medium term, Jazz could probably replace the Q300s with Q400s and then use those Q300s on -100 routes, taking the -100s out of service.

Another option for some -100 routes might be to replace them with Beeches on a higher frequency. Is there anything out there between a Beech and a -100 in size (25-30ish seats)?

EDIT: Does Air Canada have rules (like the major airlines in the US) about how many seats a regional airliner can have?

EDIT: in other news, Air Canada is offering 30% off for travel from Toronto Island to Montreal, Halifax, Moncton and Quebec City. I guess if you are going to a non-Porter destination, you are out of luck. Coincidence, I am sure. I expect it just happens that Air Canada has lower costs flying to those cities than to others such as Fredericton.

http://www.aircanada.com/en/offers/air/toronto_airport/toronto_airport.html
Book your flight between Toronto City Airport (YTZ) and Montreal, Halifax, Moncton and Quebec City and save 30% with Promo Code. Offer ends April 6. Book now.
Click to expand...

EDIT: In yet more news, the TPA has shortlisted the candidates for building the tunnel:
http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/media_content.asp?id=517
The three consortia invited to bid on the project - Forum Infrastructure Partners, Elite Tunnel Group and City Airport Tunnel Partners - represent a cross section of leading local and international construction and design firms. These teams have been chosen from a group that originally exceeded 50 private sector proponents. The consortia have six months to submit proposals to the TPA for its consideration and review.
Click to expand...
Information about the consortia: http://www.torontoport.com/notices/ConsortiaBackground.PDF
 
Last edited:
Hilton Head Island is almost 100 nautical miles farther from Toronto than Myrtle Beach, and I understand that MB is pushing the limits of range for Porter. I suspect that HHI is just a bit too far for a non-stop flight. Would adding HHI as an additional stop to the MB run be an option? YTZ-MYR-HHH-YTZ might work.

HHH has 300 more feet of runway than YTZ which might allow for greater range for the northward trip -- on the other hand, the higher temperature might cancel that out. If the runway is too short, then they would need to stop in MYR on the way back as well, and since they can't sell tickets on MYR-HHH alone (except as part of a longer journey that includes Canada), that would mean shuttling a mostly empty plane back and forth (assuming more people are going to MYR than HHH). It's not too far, so depending on landing fees, might be worthwhile.

A three-way ticket allowing someone to golf for a couple of days in MB, then fly to HHI for a few more days before returning to Toronto might be attractive to some. They would be able to sell MYR-HHH tickets as part of a larger package which includes YTZ (the law allows stopovers).

If they were going to extend the flight past MYR, instead of HHI, Atlanta, Orlando or Bermuda might be other options. I think a great idea would be to offer escorted trips to Orlando for kids so that parents could get off the plane in MYR and send their kids to Disney World for a few days under supervision. (That sounds silly but realize that they could probably get away with charging a lot for that).

HHI=Hilton Head Island, HHH=Hilton Head Island Airport
 
Last edited:
Wow. That was a very detailed response to a spam bot (spam post now deleted). Unfortunately, I don't think the bot will appreciate the effort.
 
Jazz is going to be in a bind. The reality is that 50 seater turbo-props just aren't all that popular. Even the ATR42 does not sell well. That's the reason Bombardier dropped the Q200 and the Q300.

Unless somebody shows up with a massive order (and I mean a launch order for 50 or more airplanes), there is no way Bombardier is going to invest in developing a mid-size turboprop.

That said, given how much Canada's population has grown since Jazz originally inducted the Dash 8 fleet. And given how much the efficiency of the Q400 has improved, it's quite possible that Jazz could have a case for going all Q400. At the very minimum, I see no reason at all for Jazz to be fielding any CRJs anymore. They should all be replaced with Q400s.
 
Toronto Port Authority invites bids for airport tunnel construction

The Toronto Port Authority announced Monday it is issuing a request for proposals to build a pedestrian and services tunnel connecting the Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport to the mainland.

The airport, located on the Toronto Island, is accessible only by ferry boat but for years the port authority has been trying to get approval to build either a bridge or tunnel to the island from the south end of Bathurst Street, which ends at the shore of Lake Ontario just north of the island airport.

The RFP, which will be a design-build-finance-maintain model, will be issued to three consortia that were short-listed as a result of a request for qualification process that started in August, 2010.

The three consortia are City Airport Tunnel Partners, Elite Tunnel Group and Forum Infrastructure Partners.

City Airport Tunnel Partners (CAT) is a joint venture between Fengate Capital and Aecon Concessions, Aecon Group's infrastructure and investment arm. Aecon Concession is joined by Honeywell Canada.

Elite Tunnel Group is comprised of: investment firm Macquarie Capital Group Ltd.; McNally Group of companies; consulting firm Morrison Hershfield; engineering firm Golder Associates Ltd; Scott Associates Architects, which designs aviation facilities; and the State Group Inc.

Forum Infrastructure Partners includes Forum Equity Partners Inc., PCL Constructors Inc., engineering consulting firm Arup, Exp Global Inc. (formerly Trow Global Holdings Inc.), Technicore Underground and ZAS Architects.

Along with announcing the RFP, the port authority said Monday it has concluded, based on comments received during the environmental assessment, that the proposed pedestrian tunnel and perimeter road project is “unlikely to cause significant, adverse environmental effects.â€

The environmental assessment was initiated in February, 2010 and considered the construction and operation of the project. It also considered cumulative effects of the project related to airline passenger use, local vehicular traffic and noise and air quality impact. Based on meetings and reports from the environmental assessment process, the port authority said it “continues to consider proceeding with the project.â€

The consortia have six months to submit proposals to the TPA for its consideration and review.

http://www.dcnonl.com/article/id43762

http://www.thestar.com/news/article...lists-firms-to-build-tunnel-to-island-airport
 
erikyow said:
Not sure. Most of the routes within Ontario are either already served by Porter, do better on RJs, or will probably see Dash 8s once Jazz takes delivery of the Q400s they have on order (Toronto-Thunder Bay comes to mind). The routes that aren't served by Porter might not need that much capacity, like Ottawa-London and do better with a couple of daily flights versus one flight on a larger plane.

It's kind of a shame that Bombardier canned the Q200 and Q300 airplanes. While they weren't hot sellers, it means that original Dash 8-1/300s have almost no direct replacement (only the ATR 42 remains) and routes like Ottawa-London, Ottawa-Québec, Ottawa-Montréal and Montréal-Québec might not need as much capacity as the Q400 can give, even with its lower operating costs. And I imagine Jazz will be in the market for replacements of the 60+ strong fleet of Dash 8-1/300s in the next 5-10 years.
Click to expand...

They discontinued the Q200? I just saw a new one landing at Downsview yesterday with the whole Q200 Quiet Flight livery... wish I took a picture of it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top