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

[PL1]

Once the runways are long enough to accommodate jets I can foresee the airlines suing the city to demand approval for jet ops. There’s also the issue of turbo prop aircraft availability. There’s no guarantee that Viking will be successful in marketing their new builds of former Bombardier’s Dash 8.

Dying Breed: Turboprop Regional Airliners

Turboprop Regional Airliners. - New York Aviation History - Metropolitan Airport News

metroairportnews.com

If the airport stays longer term, they should use noise as the criterion for planes that can use the airport provided there is adequate runway length). Newer jets (A220, new versions of Embraer) are apparently quieter than the Q400s that are currently used by Porter and AC Jazz at BB.

 

[Admiral Beez]

If the airport stays longer term, they should use noise as the criterion for planes that can use the airport provided there is adequate runway length). Newer jets (A220, new versions of Embraer) are apparently quieter than the Q400s that are currently used by Porter and AC Jazz at BB.

The Airbus A220 needs a 4,800ft runway, so still too short. But us plebs aside, the elite's private jets can land easily enough at YTZ.

https://simpleflying.com/top-business-jets-short-runways/

 

[dowlingm]

Once the runways are long enough to accommodate jets I can foresee the airlines suing the city to demand approval for jet ops.

As I said in one of the other threads, lots of people sue lots of people and issuance of suit does not make the action valid or worth conceding in advance. I am not a lawyer, still less a transport lawyer, but I struggle to see what a “right to operate a particular type of aircraft” would look like, especially when such actions were not issued when you could get new build BAe 146-100s,

 

[dowlingm]

If the airport stays longer term, they should use noise as the criterion for planes that can use the airport provided there is adequate runway length). Newer jets (A220, new versions of Embraer) are apparently quieter than the Q400s that are currently used by Porter and AC Jazz at BB.

My recollection is that there was at least scepticism by the no-jets crowd about the C-Series noise numbers given that Porter were shopping that idea before first flight.

In any case, if you google “A220 noise” it seems their geared turbofans make a distinctive noise

Why do A220s sound like a dying whale? - Airline Pilot Central Forums

Major - Why do A220s sound like a dying whale? - I live under final in ORD and can always, without fail, tell when an A220 is overhead. If the answer is because of the geared turbofan in the PW1000, my response is that the Spirit 320 Neos do not make the same sound with that engine, so I'd like...

www.airlinepilotforums.com

 

[PL1]

My recollection is that there was at least scepticism by the no-jets crowd about the C-Series noise numbers given that Porter were shopping that idea before first flight.

In any case, if you google “A220 noise” it seems their geared turbofans make a distinctive noise

Why do A220s sound like a dying whale? - Airline Pilot Central Forums

Major - Why do A220s sound like a dying whale? - I live under final in ORD and can always, without fail, tell when an A220 is overhead. If the answer is because of the geared turbofan in the PW1000, my response is that the Spirit 320 Neos do not make the same sound with that engine, so I'd like...

www.airlinepilotforums.com

Yes, they are actual planes now, so no one has to try to make a case based only on a design (at least for these planes!). Quality of noise is also important, and what frequency they are loud at, and what directions they sound loudest.

Anyway, I think extending runways to accommodate new planes types will (likely) be a non-starter.

 

[smallspy]

Why does everyone assume that the current placement of the runways is a given?! Move them further away from the city and everyone is happy! And I have yet to hear a valid reason for why it can’t be done which means there isn’t one and the real reason is political or bureaucratic.

Because the cost of doing that would dwarf the cost of extending the RESA even to its absolute maximum extant by many times over?

Dan

 

[Northern Light]

Why does everyone assume that the current placement of the runways is a given?! Move them further away from the city and everyone is happy! And I have yet to hear a valid reason for why it can’t be done which means there isn’t one and the real reason is political or bureaucratic.

You've been given several good reasons above, including @smallspy who is entirely on point.

Now, lets add:

1) Anywhere that is not the airport, on the Islands is City of Toronto property, A Park, and beaches, and is not available.

2) Extending the runway directly west, much further than 200M you will run into serious issues with Ontario Place, both existing and proposed, and marina traffic in the vicinity as well, not to mention sewer issues.

Further, a significant western runway extension would place the flight path/approach over Humber Bay......are you aware of anything tall there that could possibly be a problem for a low-flying plane on take off/ landing?

3) Re-orienting the runway would not simply be expensive, there is no flight path /overun space to the north if you do that. There are very large towers at Lakeshore Bathurst, smaller ones, and some silos we all like very close at hand.

Re-orienting would also impact Hanlan's Beach.

***

Put another way, not happening, no chance.

 

[Admiral Beez]

As a downtown resident who hated the taxi ride to Pearson I used to be a regular user of YTZ. But once the UPE was operational I no longer saw the benefits. I recently flew YTZ to Midway and the fog delays were over ten hours, while YYZ was fully operational.

 

[SubHuman]

Once the runways are long enough to accommodate jets I can foresee the airlines suing the city to demand approval for jet ops...

Other than Porter (about 10 years ago), what airline has ever expressed any interest in wanting to use a hypothetically expanded YTZ for jets?

 

[Carpe Diem]

@Northern Light
Agreed that a compelling vision is the foundation for city building and these ambitious projects. The process by which that vision is chosen is a bit vague to me. My hope is that the individuals and groups who present to the decision makers is sound, and experience and track record play a large role.

On aligned interest, I can see how that worked for a development/public realm/flood protection project like the Lower Don. It seems it could have worked in the same for the Exhibition (but as you said, I cannot recall much about anything compelling or aligned there). The same could be said for Ontario Place.

The Gardiner and the Don Valley Park seem more challenging to find aligned interests. The Gardiner is an important piece of infrastructure, and I don't think I have the understanding of how to get groups aligned on a vision. Though, the rehabilitation project does unlock some development land at the east end during the last phase if I recall. The Don Valley Park is seemingly a nature/parkland endeavour. As a very frequent user of the entire space, I can think of small things that could be beneficial to private enterprise, but keeping the space almost entirely natural would be the priority.

Both are hugely important parts of the city, but it is hard to see how interests could align enough on each to create momentum and draw funding. In any event, as the Lower Don nears its completion, I hope we as a city continue to build and get the ball rolling on another ambitious project of similar value to the residents and visitors. Much like transit projects and infrastructure repairs, we need to build on the expertise developed and continue to think about the future.

 

[robmausser]

Other than Porter (about 10 years ago), what airline has ever expressed any interest in wanting to use a hypothetically expanded YTZ for jets?

The only reason Air Canada opposed the use of jets was because at the time, the airport was owned by Porter. It was not a "we dont want jets downtown" it was a "we cant have jets downtown too so we dont want Porter to"

You better believe that if there were more slots available to AC at Billy Bishop and not taken up mostly by Porter even still to this day, Air Canada would be foaming at the mouth to operate jets from the island.

This is why you won't ever see Porter relinquish their slots at Billy Bishop, even if its not making them money. They know as soon as they do, some other airline will swoop in and take them, and will be a competition to them. The only way Porter will ever give up those slots is if they file for Chapter 11. The only reason they expanded to Pearson is because as an airline, you are dead if you don't constantly expand and grow, and they had no choice. But the island airport is the only thing not only differentiating their portfolio from another airline in Canada, but also having those slots is stopping possible competition.