News   Nov 11, 2024
News Roundup for November 11, 2024
 185     0 
News   Nov 11, 2024
Oneset
 347     0 
News   Nov 08, 2024
Proposal Quadruples In Height Across From Long Branch GO
 3.2K     6 

Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)

Can't wait for the KPMG report to come out and settle this debate. I am looking forward to everyone being equally disappointed.

There will be a case for some kind of airport. But it won't be anywhere close to what Mark envisions. And any commercial expansion will have to be contingent on HFR to cover the political left flank on this topic. I'm foreseeing an oversized replacement for Buttonville and Oshawa with some small commercial capacity.
 
kEiThZ said:
Can't wait for the KPMG report to come out and settle this debate. I am looking forward to everyone being equally disappointed.

There will be a case for some kind of airport. But it won't be anywhere close to what Mark envisions. And any commercial expansion will have to be contingent on HFR to cover the political left flank on this topic. I'm foreseeing an oversized replacement for Buttonville and Oshawa with some small commercial capacity.
Click to expand...

That is the most I expect too.
 
Irishmonk said:
Sitting on the north-eastern fringe of the GGHA, Pickering seems like the wrong location for a new international airport. It should be in a more central position so as to benefit more people who live within a 1 hour drive radius. From my limited perspective it makes a ton more sense to massively expand Pearson (two more piers + huge transit terminal/processing center + new runway) over the next two decades and consider additions to an existing airport like Hamilton. There are plenty of airports in the world with smaller footprints than Pearson that handle much more traffic.

Additionally, the economic benefit argument is a non-starter since it equally applies to any large new chunk of infrastructure--whether it be HSR, a new subway line or an airport expansion. The only difference is who pockets the benefits from said infrastructure project. (Which is why corrupt, authoritarian states LOVE giant new airports while free market democracies rarely attempt them any more--seriously, are there any new international airports being built in N America?) Anyway, I digress. As a non expert on these matters I'll leave it at that, and wait for stronger arguments to alter my current position.

On edit: sorry michael_can, didn't mean to parrot what you said; just saw your post after I posted mine. =/
Click to expand...

It's hardly the north-eastern fringe of the GGH area. There's Pickering (100k), Ajax (120k), then Oshawa (160k). That's almost 400,000 people within the immediate eastern catchment before including the series of towns leading to Peterborough 50miles away, the actual north-eastern fringe of the Greater Golden Horseshoe. What else does Pickering straddle? Toronto, the largest city in the country. And York Region. It's pretty central all things considered. If a new large airport were to be considered today I'm pretty sure this site would be it, which likely helped the reasoning years ago.

I'm not too keen either way. But one thing I'm curious about is sure maybe Pearson can be significantly expanded, but what about the roads leading into and out of it. They seem like they're pretty well full. And it seems like people are betting on Hamilton being a contender for a secondary major airport. but that also appears to be pretty well choked in. The 403 up/down the mountain is like the one way in and it's tight during rush. Don't see that being expanded. And in terms of fringe-worthiness, location-wise it appears moreso.
 
Irishmonk said:
(Which is why corrupt, authoritarian states LOVE giant new airports while free market democracies rarely attempt them any more--seriously, are there any new international airports being built in N America?) Anyway, I digress. As a non expert on these matters I'll leave it at that, and wait for stronger arguments to alter my current position.
Click to expand...

That is actually a really good question. When was the last time a completely new international airport was opened in North America? Sure there have been plenty of new terminals replacing old terminals on existing sites. Have there been any "we're taking this farmer's field and turning it into an airport" projects since Mirabel?
 
gweed123 said:
That is actually a really good question. When was the last time a completely new international airport was opened in North America? Sure there have been plenty of new terminals replacing old terminals on existing sites. Have there been any "we're taking this farmer's field and turning it into an airport" projects since Mirabel?
Click to expand...
Denver International airport
Largest airport in North America by total land area and second largest in the world- 1995
 
socamonarch said:
Denver International airport
Largest airport in North America by total land area and second largest in the world- 1995
Click to expand...

Thank you, that's a good one. Much like Mirabel, it was built to replace an existing airport that had become hemmed in. Unlike Mirabel however, it actually worked, and its predecessor airport (Stapleton) was closed and redeveloped.
 
44 North said:
It's hardly the north-eastern fringe of the GGH area. There's Pickering (100k), Ajax (120k), then Oshawa (160k). That's almost 400,000 people within the immediate eastern catchment before including the series of towns leading to Peterborough 50miles away, the actual north-eastern fringe of the Greater Golden Horseshoe. What else does Pickering straddle? Toronto, the largest city in the country. And York Region. It's pretty central all things considered. If a new large airport were to be considered today I'm pretty sure this site would be it, which likely helped the reasoning years ago.

I'm not too keen either way. But one thing I'm curious about is sure maybe Pearson can be significantly expanded, but what about the roads leading into and out of it. They seem like they're pretty well full. And it seems like people are betting on Hamilton being a contender for a secondary major airport. but that also appears to be pretty well choked in. The 403 up/down the mountain is like the one way in and it's tight during rush. Don't see that being expanded. And in terms of fringe-worthiness, location-wise it appears moreso.
Click to expand...

right you are, indeed it’s even larger than that. There are 2.4 million people now living with in a 30km radius of Pickering airport making it the 4th largest natural passenger catchment area in Canada.

the 30 km comes from the Marchetti Constant, the idea that people have always been willing to commute for about a half-hour, one way, from their homes each day.

for numbers and to how the pickering airport catchment area ranks see:

https://pickeringairport.org/where-are-the-major-airports-in-the-greater-toronto-area/
 
MarkBrooks said:
right you are, indeed it’s even larger than that. There are 2.4 million people now living with in a 30km radius of Pickering airport making it the 4th largest natural passenger catchment area in Canada.

the 30 km comes from the Marchetti Constant, the idea that people have always been willing to commute for about a half-hour, one way, from their homes each day.

for numbers and to how the pickering airport catchment area ranks see:

https://pickeringairport.org/where-are-the-major-airports-in-the-greater-toronto-area/
Click to expand...

Does the daily commuting radius really apply to an airport though? People are probably willing to travel further if it's for the purpose of catching a flight. I put it in the same category as travelling to a sporting event (i.e. people are willing to make a longer trip if it's for a specific purpose on occasion).
 
MarkBrooks said:
right you are, indeed it’s even larger than that. There are 2.4 million people now living with in a 30km radius of Pickering airport making it the 4th largest natural passenger catchment area in Canada.

the 30 km comes from the Marchetti Constant, the idea that people have always been willing to commute for about a half-hour, one way, from their homes each day.

for numbers and to how the pickering airport catchment area ranks see:

https://pickeringairport.org/where-are-the-major-airports-in-the-greater-toronto-area/
Click to expand...


On this I agree. There is a large population base in the Eastern Greater Golden Horseshoe without convenient access to an international airport. Problem is I just don't see a domestic airline (existing or yet to be created) that would operate out of this airport.

gweed123 said:
Does the daily commuting radius really apply to an airport though? People are probably willing to travel further if it's for the purpose of catching a flight. I put it in the same category as travelling to a sporting event (i.e. people are willing to make a longer trip if it's for a specific purpose on occasion).
Click to expand...

This both helps and harms the Pickering situation. Giving it a LARGER catchment area results in a larger population base, but it also cuts further into Pearson's, now larger, population base. Resulting in a larger number of people living in the catchment area of both airports
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
This both helps and harms the Pickering situation. Giving it a LARGER catchment area results in a larger population base, but it also cuts further into Pearson's, now larger, population base. Resulting in a larger number of people living in the catchment area of both airports
Click to expand...

I think it just changes the situation. It goes from "this is the only airport within this given proximity for X many people" (which I think is a false premise for an urban area like the GTHA) to "X many people have the realistic option of using either airport".

In the case of the latter, it comes down to which airlines are flying to what destinations at what price point that will ultimately determine which airport people choose. For the vast majority of the GTHA, they would be able to use either airport. Looking solely at a relatively arbitrarily/incorrectly defined 'catchment area' as the method by which to allocate usage isn't the way to go, in my opinion.
 
The catchment area for a travel hub is different than that for commuting. For one thing, you don't do it every day (except, obviously, for airport employees). The broader catchment area is evidenced by the numerous airport shuttle services from as far away as North Bay.
 
kEiThZ said:
Can't really use driving distances while flying. Use Great Circle Mapper for aviation distances and add 10% for realism if you must.

www.gcmap.com

A map from the Great Circle Mapper

A map from the Great Circle Mapper
www.gcmap.com www.gcmap.com

The great circle distance is 340 km to Pearson and 351km to the Island.

For emissions, the ICAO calculator says 58.9 kg CO2 for Pearson-Sudbury and 54.2 kg CO2 for Billy Bishop-Sudbury.
Click to expand...
For what it's worth, the ICAO methodology adds 50km to the GCD for flights under 550 km, which seems reasonable when reviewing a sample of flights on the route and erring on over-estimating when looking at certain segments. (With favourable weather today, YYZ-YOW is currently very close to the GCD, with average less than 10km over.)

Other issues with the estimates made by the ICAO is that load factor/cargo factor are calculated at a continental level. For a regional flight like Sudbury, both are likely to be significantly lower than the continental average. These figures are not readily available to the public, but in general, regional flights operate at much lower load factors to feed more profitable routes. According to Porter themselves, they were averaging only a 50% load factor across their network until recently. The load factor ICAO uses for intra-North American flights, by point of camparison, is 81.8%.

Edit to clarify: with lower load factors CO2 per passenger would be higher than the ICAO estimates. If the actual load factor is half what ICAO estimates, the CO2 per passenger would be double. Differences in cargo factors would likely have a much smaller effect.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top