Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)

[kEiThZ]

No one needs to convince Pickering investors of anything, all that is needed for the airport to happen is that the GTAA gets out of the way.

What’s the timeline for investment and when should we expect the introduction of a consortium to develop Pickering?

I remain skeptical that the only thing stopping Pickering is some lobbying from the GTAA. If that’s true, the Eastern GTA has some really shitty and incompetent politicians.

Since the GTAA clearly intends to fight, the question now is how big are the cojones on our Minister of Transport? Can he take on Ontarios biggest monopoly and survive the political fallout? Or will he kick the building infrastructure crisis down the road for the next guy, and for the next guy... like they did for years on the oil transportation/ pipeline crisis in Alberta, until the oil sector collapsed ?

I am not one for conspiracy theories. Do you have evidence to show that Pickering is being stymied by the MoT because he is being swayed by lobbying from the GTAA? That’s quite the assertion.

Also, Pickering has been on the books forever. How come pro-Pickering proponents didn’t have any success with the business friendly Conservatives before this government?

Something tells me, it’s not really the GTAA holding you back....

And Alberta’s oil sector has collapsed? Really? Mark, if you keep up the hyperbole and hysterics, people are really going to question your honesty, sincerity and competence. Just a reminder that this forum is public. I would assume any of your potential investors are also taking a peek.

 

[MarkBrooks]

What’s the timeline for investment and when should we expect the introduction of a consortium to develop Pickering?

I remain skeptical that the only thing stopping Pickering is some lobbying from the GTAA. If that’s true, the Eastern GTA has some really shitty and incompetent politicians.



I am not one for conspiracy theories. Do you have evidence to show that Pickering is being stymied by the MoT because he is being swayed by lobbying from the GTAA? That’s quite the assertion.

Also, Pickering has been on the books forever. How come pro-Pickering proponents didn’t have any success with the business friendly Conservatives before this government?

Something tells me, it’s not really the GTAA holding you back....

And Alberta’s oil sector has collapsed? Really? Mark, if you keep up the hyperbole and hysterics, people are really going to question your honesty, sincerity and competence. Just a reminder that this forum is public. I would assume any of your potential investors are also taking a peek.

Here is our take on the urgent timeline:
https://pickeringairport.org/pickering-airports-urgent-timeline/

I am expecting a public announcement in the spring of 2019 with the long awaited release of the updated KPMG report. However recent announcement that the GM plant is closing in Oshawa May speed this up. The time table is a point of debate. The attached Time table is from a report done for Durham region by AECOM.

The same report talks about the stark reality of the runway capacity short fall if you want a second point of view.

I have attacked 2 pages from this public report.

The GTAAs opposition to Pickering is hardly some big conspiracy, It is written into its land lease agreement for Pearson. What, you want a video of Howard shouting it from the rooftop of the plush GTAA building? Or perhaps turning off the indoor waterfall in protest? Maybe shot in 8 mm B&W film?

I have attached the section from the publicly available lease, but I can label it for your eyes only if that makes you feel better.

As for your crack about Alberta, If you are a Canadian, and are unaware of the deep economic pain being suffered in Alberta due to the pipeline infrastructure fiasco then I have no words for you.

 

[gweed123]

I think Mark Brooks' argument is that LCC carriers like WOW, Wizz Air, Norwegian and Ryanair would fly to Pickering instead of Pearson. And I actually agree with him, this thesis does sound plausible.

We see this in other parts of the world. In London, Ryanair mostly operates out of Stansted, Easyjet operates mostly out of Gatwick, BA operates mostly out of Heathrow with holiday flights out of Gatwick. Orly is basically an LCC airport for Transavia (owned by Air France-KLM) and Easyjet. Or we could get division by mainline alliance. In New York, effectively each airport has become an alliance hub. Newark for United/Star. JFK for American/Oneworld and Delta/SkyTeam. Tokyo with Haneda and Narita is going the same way.

Where I disagree with Mark is that this is achievable without vastly limiting predatory behaviour from Air Canada and Westjet. To do this at the Island, Porter had to show up with vast amounts of capital and virtually create an almost monopoly by buying out most of the airport. The likelihood of this happening in Pickering is low. And so AC would move just enough Rouge flights there to compete with all the European LCC competition coming in and drive them into the ground. And then pack up and move back to Pearson, once those carriers were driven away.

If they can find a way to lock AC and Westjet out, they may have a fighting chance. But the devil is in the details. And that's why I am saying, this is all fluff until we see actually investors show up with cash. At least, Mr. Brooks has some credibility, compared to the nonsense with MOOSE. we've discussed on here.

I think where these "secondary" airports have a market is not so much as transfer points but as destination points. If I were flying through Chicago, there's no way I would fly into Midway, as my connecting flight would more than likely be out of O'Hare. But if I was just going to Chicago for a weekend? Absolutely I would do that if it saved me some money. Likewise with flying into John Wayne vs LAX, or Abbotsford vs Vancouver (hello Swoop!), or West Palm or Fort Lauderdale instead of Miami.

If the city/region in which that airport is located is enough of a draw that it's a destination as much as it is a gateway, I think a second airport can work, but only as a final destination. The moment you start trying to schedule connecting flights in and out of it, you're pooched.

 

[kEiThZ]

The GTAAs opposition to Pickering is hardly some big conspiracy, It is written into its land lease agreement for Pearson.

You have insinuated the Transport Minister was in their pocket through successful lobbying. This is the conspiracy I was referring to.

The attached Time table is from a report done for Durham region by AECOM.

I asked when we could expect an announcement of investment. Not your timetable. You say there are millions and millions ready to invest in this. When are those investors going to reveal themselves?

As for your crack about Alberta, If you are a Canadian, and are unaware of the deep economic pain being suffered in Alberta due to the pipeline infrastructure fiasco then I have no words for you.

Alberta's immediate economic pains are caused by dropping oil prices. Not by then having to ship by rail. They did just fine when prices were up.

I consider it quite telling that you have to resort to attacking Pearson incessantly, and go on tangents about Alberta instead of making a case for Pickering.


You should note that I am not actually opposed to the Pickering airport. I am just skeptical the business case exists for that to be a commercial airport, rather than a GA field that replaces Buttonville and Oshawa.

 

[micheal_can]

I think where these "secondary" airports have a market is not so much as transfer points but as destination points. If I were flying through Chicago, there's no way I would fly into Midway, as my connecting flight would more than likely be out of O'Hare. But if I was just going to Chicago for a weekend? Absolutely I would do that if it saved me some money. Likewise with flying into John Wayne vs LAX, or Abbotsford vs Vancouver (hello Swoop!), or West Palm or Fort Lauderdale instead of Miami.

If the city/region in which that airport is located is enough of a draw that it's a destination as much as it is a gateway, I think a second airport can work, but only as a final destination. The moment you start trying to schedule connecting flights in and out of it, you're pooched.

Toronto and the GTA could be enough of a draw for the business person. Would that be enough though?

 

[kEiThZ]

I think where these "secondary" airports have a market is not so much as transfer points but as destination points.

We already have one of these: at the Island. And thanks to runway length and aircraft restriction, it's effectively perimeter restricted, like LGA or DCA. And YTZ is even better positioned than DCA or LGA. So the question becomes, what additional traffic would be gained by having another secondary airport (or a replacement for YTZ).

 

[TransitBart]

When the GTAA was created, did Transport Canada retain any ability to push GTAA to make capital investments in the name of "public good" or some concept like that?

 

[TransitBart]

Somewhere out there, there is a pier called G and a runway called 05R-23L looking to be built. There is a bit of capacity in Malton yet.

Also - the southern W/E runway pair is not far enough apart for independent take-off landing operation on each runway so one is used for take-offs and the other for landings in east/west wind conditions as shown below.

 

[MarkBrooks]

Somewhere out there, there is a pier called G and a runway called 05R-23L looking to be built. There is a bit of capacity in Malton yet.

Also - the southern W/E runway pair is not far enough apart for independent take-off landing operation on each runway so one is used for take-offs and the other for landings in east/west wind conditions as shown below.

View attachment 165085

Yes there is, but by the time Pickering is open ( 10-15 year plan and build) it’s gone and we are into a congested unsafe mess. Thus the need to start in spring of 2019, to be even partially open by 2028-2032.

 

[TransitBart]

Yes there is, but by the time Pickering is open ( 10-15 year plan and build) it’s gone and we are into a congested unsafe mess. Thus the need to start in spring of 2019, to be even partially open by 2028-2032.

I would rather take apart half of Brampton and extend runway 08/26 at YTZ before a dime is spent in a Durham cowpatch.

 

[MarkBrooks]

You have insinuated the Transport Minister was in their pocket through successful lobbying. This is the conspiracy I was referring to.



I asked when we could expect an announcement of investment. Not your timetable. You say there are millions and millions ready to invest in this. When are those investors going to reveal themselves?



Alberta's immediate economic pains are caused by dropping oil prices. Not by then having to ship by rail. They did just fine when prices were up.

I consider it quite telling that you have to resort to attacking Pearson incessantly, and go on tangents about Alberta instead of making a case for Pickering.


You should note that I am not actually opposed to the Pickering airport. I am just skeptical the business case exists for that to be a commercial airport, rather than a GA field that replaces Buttonville and Oshawa.

Enough with the conspiracy theory’s. I most certainly did not suggest that our ministry of transport is in anyone’s pocket. But you do not take on a monopoly which accounts for 6% of Ontario’s GDP lightly. Even if it is benevolently run, it and the investors that have invested in it, and air Canadas Vision, have tremendous political pull.

I did say the opposite of what you Suggested,

To recap:
Since the GTAA clearly intends to fight, the question now is how big are the cojones on our Minister of Transport? Can he take on Ontarios biggest monopoly and survive the political fallout? Or will he kick the building infrastructure crisis down the road for the next guy,

We will find out soon. The spring of 2019 should be the point when the KPMG report is released. The process from that point forward should be outlined at the same time, not before.

 

[TransitBart]

You should note that I am not actually opposed to the Pickering airport. I am just skeptical the business case exists for that to be a commercial airport, rather than a GA field that replaces Buttonville and Oshawa.

And that's all there is folks. *flourish* - like Johnny Carson - and I'm outta' here.

 

[TransitBart]

It is not the denizens of urbantoronto who need to be convinced. Rather, someone with quite a bit of spare change.

 

[MarkBrooks]

I would rather take apart half of Brampton and extend runway 08/26 at YTZ before a dime is spent in a Durham cowpatch.

Sounds like you are familiar with Brampton, a private flying club that can’t even take a dash 7, but I like it anyways. I did drop a Kodiak through the Brampton buzz box this summer. (Buzz box is a Buttonville nickname for when the circuit is always full and no tower). A great place to work a student thru mandatory frequency issues.
And forget city center, if Porter, the port authority and Bob can’t get the runway extended with a promise of buying 50 Cseries jets, and paying for it, it’s not happening.

I am Looking forward to watching a Billion dollar Durham land reserve you call a cow patch finally turn into the 3 Billion dollar airport it was set aside for 45 years ago.

 

[EnviroTO]

Historically there has been more anti-Pickering Airport than pro-Pickering Airport lobbying. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole reason the GTAA was put in an oversight role of the Pickering Airport planning was to distance government from backlash and protest. For years politicians have been asked to surrender the Pickering Airport lands and cancel all plans for the airport.