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

voxpopulicosmicum said:
Further up in the thread there are posts that suggest extending the runway would be necessary for a Q400 to take off fully-fuelled, and that it is this factor that effectively prevents Porter from flying direct to Florida (and other destinations of a similar range). There is also suggestion that there exist jets that, relative to the Q400, are (1) quieter, (2) have a shorter runway requirement and (3) have a greater range. I'm not sure if these characteristics are found in a single type of jet.
Click to expand...

They're smoking something. There are quieter jets to be sure. And there are jets with runway requirements that fit within the Island's runway operating length. But none of these are commerically viable. They don't carry enough passengers to matter. And if they're quiet, they wont't have enough thrust to get off the ground (any 70 seat turbofan is still louder at take-off thrust). And if they're quiet and fit within the runway envelope, their range would be pathetic, since they won't be getting off the ground with that much gas and more of it will be used to get to cruise altitude than the turboprop.

A specific advantage of turboprops is that the giant fan blows air over the wings even at low speeds. This allows turboprops to have shorter take-off field lengths. The velocity of the airflow over the wings is higher than the airspeed of the aircraft. This is not the case in turbofan aircraft.


voxpopulicosmicum said:
In any event, it could very well be the case that the jet vs. turboprop issue is a false dichotomy, and that both waterfront residents AND BBTCA passengers and airlines would be better off with certain jet technology, but are instead forced by circumstances to live with Q400s. Unfortunately, these are not debates that are had in public. Instead we are left with a polarized mess in which both sides makes maximalist demands, and the "public bodies" charged with governance either (1) abdicate (i.e. the feds and the province) or (2) take sides (the TPA and the City).
Click to expand...


Actually, it's perfectly clear. The argument against "jets" has long been because (1) there was legitimate concern about noise and (2) opponents hoped to kill the airport by making it commercially non-viable. The latter game plan was shot to pieces by the Q400 being not just commercially viable, but actually being the ideal aircraft for this situation. Turboprops are perfect for short distances and short runways.

So opponents have now resorted to tactics like curtailing the construction of a bridge, now that commercial viability is starting to flounder as an argument.

I don't get what it is with residents of this city. They want to be a global city. But aren't willing to invest in world-class infrastructure. And actually want to destroy the infrastructure they do have. Washington with Reagan. New York with JFK. London with City. All view their core area airports as assets. And they fly large aircraft into them. Nobody is even considering that here.
 
JFK is actually the furthest from Manhattan of the three major NY-area airports. And Chicago is one example of a city which demolished their downtown airport. There are all sorts of airports located adjacent to populated areas though, even where they aren't downtown.
 
voxpopulicosmicum said:
Oh well, I guess those two decades of actual environmental regulation were fun while they lasted. But at least I can be sure that a return to the dark, filth-spewing days of yore will yield widespread economic growth for our society.
Click to expand...
Never mind, according to Brian Iler and his buds YTZ will go bankrupt any minute now*

* one of the interesting contradiction in the local residents' frequent paeans in the press about the island airport was that Porter/expanded YTZ would bring huge amounts of traffic to the area because of all the people flying, but at the same time nobody really wanted to fly from there so it was a certain money loser. (It was also impossible for the Q400 to operate safely on a 4000 ft runway) The first bit was true, in part because of a lack of staging space for taxis, but if the local councillor got over his allegiance to local over city-wide politics then maybe the TTC could help reduce the number of taxis by operating one or more bus routes to the Ferry Dock, since a 200m streetcar track extension is too much to hope for.
 
Porter has a shuttle bus; I'm not sure adding a TTC bus would make much difference -- why would you take a TTC bus when there's already a free shuttle? Those who prefer taxis will continue to take them.

And what route would the bus link to? Once the streetcars are back up and running, it would be odd to add a bus just to go in and out of the airport.
 
jamincan said:
JFK is actually the furthest from Manhattan of the three major NY-area airports. And Chicago is one example of a city which demolished their downtown airport. There are all sorts of airports located adjacent to populated areas though, even where they aren't downtown.
Click to expand...


Ah, yes. Daley's covert night op. The FAA should have had him prosecuted for that. No NOTAM. No notice to aircraft owners on the Island. In any event, the difference there is that the city owned the airport. And another huge difference is that Chicago still has Midway. That airport is half the distance from the Loop that Pearson is from our Financial District.

In any event, it's not just downtown airports. Think of a place like Hong Kong with its old airport. They made aviation work because their survival depended on it. People in Toronto seem to think that they can become a world-class city without having world class infrastructure which ensure smooth and efficient commerce. A downtown airport isn't essential for this, to be sure, but we do have one, and we should be treating it like an asset, not a liability.
 
kEiThZ said:
Ah, yes. Daley's covert night op. The FAA should have had him prosecuted for that.
Click to expand...
They did but could only levy a relatively minor fine. I believe regulations were amended to make a future such manoeuver more expensive, but that was too late for Meigs.
 
PinkLucy said:
Porter has a shuttle bus; I'm not sure adding a TTC bus would make much difference -- why would you take a TTC bus when there's already a free shuttle? Those who prefer taxis will continue to take them.

And what route would the bus link to? Once the streetcars are back up and running, it would be odd to add a bus just to go in and out of the airport.
Click to expand...
At present the shuttle only goes to Union/Royal York express and you still have to pay a fare to enter the TTC system. With the arrival of Air Canada and almost certainly WestJet once their Regional Q400s arrive, Porter may not wish to continue providing a shuttle for passengers of its competitors.

A TTC bus route could use a street other than Bathurst or Queens Quay to bring transit to the middle to the transit bereft condo district and terminate on a loop somewhere in the Queen/King core area. For me the optimal solution would be a streetcar Bathurst-Eireann Quay Loop-Queens Quay return but the money would be difficult to get, the local councillor unsupportive and the geography tight.
 
dowlingm said:
At present the shuttle only goes to Union/Royal York express and you still have to pay a fare to enter the TTC system. With the arrival of Air Canada and almost certainly WestJet once their Regional Q400s arrive, Porter may not wish to continue providing a shuttle for passengers of its competitors.

A TTC bus route could use a street other than Bathurst or Queens Quay to bring transit to the middle to the transit bereft condo district and terminate on a loop somewhere in the Queen/King core area. For me the optimal solution would be a streetcar Bathurst-Eireann Quay Loop-Queens Quay return but the money would be difficult to get, the local councillor unsupportive and the geography tight.
Click to expand...

The fastest way to the Island Airport (at least to the ever-growing passenger queue to get on the ferry) is to ride a Bixi bike to the Bathurst/Queen's Quay Bixi station.
 
k10ery said:
^Please don't give away the secret way to avoid the ferry queue altogether.
Click to expand...

Walk up the stairs instead of taking the escalator?

Park your car on the island itself; or take a cab so you can use the lower deck?

Pole jump the gap?

Fly out of Pearson?
 
Last edited:
I flew to Chicago on Porter last Monday and returned Wednesday night. My wife drove me to the airport and took taxi back. The trip was great, Midway is fantastic, though it took nearly as long to get my rental car from Avis as it took to fly from Toronto. Only hiccup was on the taxi ride home to Cabbagetown from Billy Bishop when for some reason the driver went up on the GEW thinking he could take the Jarvis exit, which was closed, thus causing a costly detour - I was tempted to report the driver, but I suspect it was an honest mistake and I expense the fare regardless.

Anyway, yeah for Porter and the island airport. As a downtowner who flies to Chicago and New York I love it.
 
dowlingm said:
At present the shuttle only goes to Union/Royal York express and you still have to pay a fare to enter the TTC system. With the arrival of Air Canada and almost certainly WestJet once their Regional Q400s arrive, Porter may not wish to continue providing a shuttle for passengers of its competitors.

A TTC bus route could use a street other than Bathurst or Queens Quay to bring transit to the middle to the transit bereft condo district and terminate on a loop somewhere in the Queen/King core area. For me the optimal solution would be a streetcar Bathurst-Eireann Quay Loop-Queens Quay return but the money would be difficult to get, the local councillor unsupportive and the geography tight.
Click to expand...

An operational fix would be to request anyone boarding the porter shuttle to present a Porter ticket for that day. Not sure if the drivers are willing to enforce this though.

***EDIT***
Actually the more that I think about it. The shuttle could simply be rebranded from a "porter shuttle" to an "airport shuttle" operations and passenger experience would change little (save for re-branded and re-painted buses). The cost would than be rolled into the landing fees charged to the airlines landing there, again it would change little for Deluce's corporate operations. In fact it would probably help reduce some of the costs borne by Porter airlines since the cost of operating the shuttle will now be shared with 2 - 3 other airlines.

Deluce gets the benefit of being able to say "hey look at us be good people and sharing the infrastructure we built with others"
 
Last edited:
PinkLucy said:
Porter has a shuttle bus; I'm not sure adding a TTC bus would make much difference -- why would you take a TTC bus when there's already a free shuttle? Those who prefer taxis will continue to take them.

And what route would the bus link to? Once the streetcars are back up and running, it would be odd to add a bus just to go in and out of the airport.
Click to expand...

I've often wondered why the TTC hasn't endeavored to provide a better service to the foot of Bathurst (or whatever you want to call it.) The westbound streetcar doesn't even stop at the Bathurst intersection. You have to get off at Dan Leckie Way and hoof it the rest of the way with your luggage. Yes, Porter does provide their shuttle, which is great if you're starting your journey from the Union Station area. For those looking for some continuity on the TTC right down to the airport, though, the TTC falls down at the end of the trip.

The coming extension of Bremner Bl to Bathurst may provide a good chance to extend a bus route to the bottom of Bathurst, I would think. A TTC bus route starting around Union, going along the Bremner extension and ending up at the airport would end up having a pretty good passenger load quite probably.
 
The westbound streetcar does stop at Bathurst, right after it turns north -- although for the next while there is no streetcar. I've avoided the bus along there, so I'm not sure where it stops. Regardless, you still have to walk from QQ/Bathurst. I always just walk to the airport anyway -- much easier than dealing with traffic/transit :) Of course, it helps that I live nearby.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top