Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)

[lenaitch]

I am not talking about general aviation. I am talking about a plane I would take from Sudbury to Toronto.

Did you notice the words high speed are in brackets? That means that ideally it would be that. Think of it more like the UPP Express. One train between Union and Pearson via the current ROW. One between Pearson and Pickering via the Midtown Corridor. One between Union and Pickering via the Richmond Hill line. Ideally, speeds of over 100km/hr, if not 150km/hr would be sufficient to allow fast enough transfers between 3 major hubs.

Midtown: Raises the whole issue of any transit on the one-and-only CP mainline in southern Ontario, regarding both this service and all other transit discussions.
Richmond Hill Line: Assume you mean the Stouffville line. Actually, the closest connection would be the CP Havelock Sub, which brings us back to the above.
I don't know if any of the alignments would support 100-150 kph, let alone the adjoining neighbourhoods.

 

[micheal_can]

Midtown: Raises the whole issue of any transit on the one-and-only CP mainline in southern Ontario, regarding both this service and all other transit discussions.
Richmond Hill Line: Assume you mean the Stouffville line. Actually, the closest connection would be the CP Havelock Sub, which brings us back to the above.
I don't know if any of the alignments would support 100-150 kph, let alone the adjoining neighbourhoods.

Sorry, yes, the Stouffville line. As far as the CP line, it is time CP finally realizes that they can allow passenger service along their corridors and can still run freight trains all at a profit. CN can do it, CP can. Or, we just buy that line from them via Nationalization.

 

[lenaitch]

Sorry, yes, the Stouffville line. As far as the CP line, it is time CP finally realizes that they can allow passenger service along their corridors and can still run freight trains all at a profit. CN can do it, CP can. Or, we just buy that line from them via Nationalization.

It would seem CP calculates otherwise

 

[micheal_can]

It would seem CP calculates otherwise

I guess it is time to nationalize the lines CP owns....

 

[MarkBrooks]

In honor of earth day, an look at how Canada’s new carbon tax will encourage Air Travel. Why? Because travel by air on a modern jet is more environmentally friendly than driving. Problem is we don’t have enough infrastructure to support soaring demand. You already know the rest of the story.

Does Canada’s New Carbon Tax Encourage Air Travel? - Friends of Pickering Airport

Print 🖨 PDF 📄 eBook 📱Canada is implementing its long-promised carbon tax on everything from natural gas to jet fuel. The goal of the carbon tax is to reduce emissions by encouraging Canadians to work, live and travel as efficiently as possible. Today the carbon tax is $20 per ton (4.4 cents per...

pickeringairport.org

 

[Towered]

I guess it is time to nationalize the lines CP owns....

Seriously, since they've refused to cooperate for the public good, the time has come to expropriate.

 

[kEiThZ]

What if you made Pickering the Cargo/small plane airport? So, companies like Fedex, DHL, UPS, etc could only fly into Pickering and not Pearson.

Fun fact. The majority of cargo travels in the bellies of passenger airplanes these days. Why do you think they've worked so hard to limit bags, for example? So the cargo carriers need to be co-located with passenger airlines to make transfers between their fleets and their passenger airline partners easier.

Also, any 100 passenger or smaller plane lands in Pickering as well. Leave Pearson for all the heavy haulers.

You are ignoring what so many of us have said earlier. Airlines these days base their business on connecting passengers through their hubs. Out of 100 pax on a flight from Sudbury, it's entirely likely that not even half have Toronto as their final destination.

At the same time, a (high speed) rail line through the Mid City corridor be built.

Did you notice the words high speed are in brackets? That means that ideally it would be that. Think of it more like the UPP Express.

Again. Who is going to pay for this? What it's called and what its capabilities are is all but irrelevant. Somebody has to pay for this. And if you insist that the airport authority does by charging airline or passengers, you just ruined the business case for Pickering.

People really need to stop thinking of airports as some standalone operation which you use once a year to go on vacation. They are intermodal mobility and logistics hubs. Would anybody here, for example, suggest splitting a GO/TTC bus terminal by a substantial distance?

 

[kEiThZ]

In honor of earth day, an look at how Canada’s new carbon tax will encourage Air Travel.

Making something more expensive will increase demand? This must be some new economics.....

Because travel by air on a modern jet is more environmentally friendly than driving.

Only by that misleading metric where airlines measure against the average car and consider single occupancy. A Prius with 4 passenger is more efficient per pax than any modern passenger jet.

And rail is massively more efficient:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/datablog/2009/sep/02/carbon-emissions-per-transport-type

Flying is often worse even when you consider route efficiency:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...-footprint-transportation-efficiency-graphic/

Any real cut in transport emissions is only going to come from electrification and moving all medium haul (< 500 km) intercity travel to rail where possible, while reserving flying for longer trips.

Problem is we don’t have enough infrastructure to support soaring demand.

Indeed. We should have built high speed rail in the Quebec-Windsor and Calgary-Edmonton corridors a decade ago.

 

[christiesplits]

Fun fact. The majority of cargo travels in the bellies of passenger airplanes these days. Why do you think they've worked so hard to limit bags, for example? So the cargo carriers need to be co-located with passenger airlines to make transfers between their fleets and their passenger airline partners easier.

I believe Hamilton Munro is a significant destination for cargo-only flights. I'm not sure if Southern Ontario requires more cargo airport space.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Fun fact. The majority of cargo travels in the bellies of passenger airplanes these days. Why do you think they've worked so hard to limit bags, for example? So the cargo carriers need to be co-located with passenger airlines to make transfers between their fleets and their passenger airline partners easier.



You are ignoring what so many of us have said earlier. Airlines these days base their business on connecting passengers through their hubs. Out of 100 pax on a flight from Sudbury, it's entirely likely that not even half have Toronto as their final destination.





Again. Who is going to pay for this? What it's called and what its capabilities are is all but irrelevant. Somebody has to pay for this. And if you insist that the airport authority does by charging airline or passengers, you just ruined the business case for Pickering.

People really need to stop thinking of airports as some standalone operation which you use once a year to go on vacation. They are intermodal mobility and logistics hubs. Would anybody here, for example, suggest splitting a GO/TTC bus terminal by a substantial distance?

OT but... we do have a similar situation with the Spadina extension where the TTC bus terminal is located at Pioneer Village Station, the GO bus terminal is located at 407 Station, and the Viva and YRT bus terminals located separately at VMC station.

moving on.

 

[kEiThZ]

I believe Hamilton Munro is a significant destination for cargo-only flights. I'm not sure if Southern Ontario requires more cargo airport space.

And some time sensitive cargo for the auto sector goes into Oshawa. Could migrate to a new Pickering. But how much of that demand remains post-GM is the real question.

Hamilton has plenty of room for expansion with both cargo and pax. And with improved transit links could be our version of London Stansted.

OT but... we do have a similar situation with the Spadina extension where the TTC bus terminal is located at Pioneer Village Station, the GO bus terminal is located at 407 Station, and the Viva and YRT bus terminals located separately at VMC station.

Right and I doubt anybody thinks this is ideal. What we're talking about here is even worse. We're talking about taking an existing integrated operation and breaking it apart. It'd be akin to taking the bus terminal at Kennedy station and moving it to Brimley and Eglinton.

 

[kEiThZ]

It should be noted. I am not necessarily opposed to building an airport at Pickering. I am skeptical this needs to be a major commercial airport with all the costs that entails. I have serious doubts about the business case. Especially in an era of increasing carbon taxes which are only going to make operating smaller aircraft at higher frequencies even more uneconomical.

I see the case for a large GA airport merging traffic from Buttonville, Markham and Oshawa though. Possibly even displacing the Island.

 

[narduch]

If you force Billy Bishop closed you may as well tell Porter to go bankrupt now.

 

[kEiThZ]

If you force Billy Bishop closed you may as well tell Porter to go bankrupt now.

Opening another airport with yet another airline or a new front for AC, Westjet, would probably do the same thing.

Being the exclusive domestic carrier at Pickering might give them a chance to survive, if they can pivot to a different business model. But, admittedly this would be a transition that could well take down the company.

 

[rbt]

If you force Billy Bishop closed you may as well tell Porter to go bankrupt now.

Porter should start planning for an alternative business plans now. The current governing tripartite agreement lasts until ~2033, and unlike in 1983, that land (city, federal, and a bit provincial) will be worth several billion if zoned for development. The Portlands will be largely built up by that time.

Shrinking debt and opening land for another 5000+ residents (and property tax revenue) are strong arguments in itself; even for those not naturally anti-airport. I'm sure it'll be quite a battle.