Island Airport

[Thebean]

Let's be clear. When those risky business decisions were made, 9-11 was not a part of modern history. Take away that horrible day and things may have ended differently and you might not be making continual references to "some airline". It opened a big door for your group.

Air Canada has been looking for slots for years. The Port Authority has already publicly told the lowest cost operator in the market to go pound sand, and in doing so, showing utter contempt to the tax payers they purportedly represent who would undoubtedly prefer to see the publicly owned airport be a driver to lower, not higher transportation costs for the general public.

What door did 9/11 open that was not already open? I can't think of anything WJ did post 9/11 that wasn't already planned well prior to 9/11.

I can say with no small degree of certainty that C3's days were numbered long before 9/11. We knew they'd make it through the summer 2001. It's Canada. It's the summer. Is there anything easier than making money in the airline business in July and August? It was pretty clear they were in big trouble as they tried to fill all that new capacity when seasonal demand wore off, starting in mid August 2001, well ahead of 9/11. The script had been written countless times before. It wasn't a big stretch to figure out the endgame.

I have difficulty comprehending any argument suggesting one airline, based at in the nations largest city, within close proximity to the largest ground transportation hub, after 8 years or however long they've been treading water, operating flights to the largest O & D destinations from Toronto, as well as a few other markets, needs any special help whatsoever. Is the business so fundamentally precarious it can't tolerate any direct competition? I mean, I get it if Porter was based in Saskatoon, Thunder Bay or Prince George. But Toronto?

As evidenced by their loads, they operate far too much capacity for the markets they operate in, but must do so to ensure they use all the slots. The fundamental inefficiency of their model results in the entire operation balancing on the head of a pin. That's why investors run and hide everytime Porter comes knocking. It's not scalable and it's been treading water, surviving on cash flow for ever.

Even when the Feds decided to keep AC out of YHM after the merger, WJ was already well established in that market and the YHM moratorium, as I recall, was for a couple years.

I mean, seriously? How long a free ride does Porter need before it has to stand on it's own two legs? I can't think of any airline in the western world that has needed what amounts to an extended taxpayer subsidy in order to survive.

The time has come for Porter's diaper to be removed.

If others can generate profits with lower fares, so be it. That airport should benefit all consumers, not simply Porter's fat cat buddies who travel on expense accounts. Imagine what sort of economic activity would be generated in d/t Toronto if YTZ became a low cost hub, where instead of Porter's silly $1,000 fares to Chicago, they were knocked down to about $300 for a fare booked within 7 days of travel. That's the nightmare Porter has to contend with and why they vigorously defend their monopoly position with arguments that don't hold any water at all.

[inchman]

As I have been pre-occupied with learning about helicopters and not paying much attention to anything else, could you please update the list of airlines that have applied for slots at YTZ and were declined?

Air Canada

[conehead]

As I have been pre-occupied with learning about helicopters and not paying much attention to anything else, could you please update the list of airlines that have applied for slots at YTZ and were declined?

Why are you learning about helicopters?

[inchman]

MD2, my dear, I'm not going to get into a long debate with you. Bean has already pointed out at least one hole in your story and you seem to forget that little item called the recession in the early 90s. That particular recession caused the decline of more than one airline and caused many airlines to cut back their schedules. By the time the economy came back, the airport was in severe decline with no guaranteed future.

And any sense that Air Canada orchestrated the demise of Canadian is folly. CAIL got into trouble with it's purchase of WD and never recovered. Sound familiar to your schooling from Bean? . And it was CAIL that tried to take over Air Canada because AC and its subsidiaries was worth a lot more than its stock reflected.

[blues deville]

.What door did 9/11 open that was not already open? I can't think of anything WJ did post 9/11 that wasn't already planned well prior to 9/11.I can say with no small degree of certainty that C3's days were numbered long before 9/11. We knew they'd make it through the summer 2001.

I'm sure WS had plans but without the 2nd largest airline in Canada to compete with (competition.....one of your favorite things) they were able to expand without much interference. I don't think Westjet vacations was even a consideration until much later as well.

Much like C3 grew after Wardair and some other smaller players faded away, so did WS. No planning department could have predicted what took place unless you had a crystal ball hidden under a desk.

[DEFCON]

Bean

Beddoe claimed WJ would never fly east of the Manitoba / Ontario border. His statement makes it sound like your team was content with the ‘niche’ it occupied before seeking the world? As odd but uniquely Canadian as it may be, WJ benefitted by virtue of the governments meddling in the affairs of AC when it forced AC to become an even larger, more fractured and inefficient legacy nightmare by forcing Milton’s hand with respect to the merger with CAIL. Until CR took the helm, AC was a ship adrift and being in the right place at the right time over all those special years, WJ became the huge and maybe sole beneficiary of that day’s government policy objectives. Porter is making its way in somewhat similar cloudy fashion and should the C-Series become part of Porter’s Island operation, the little carrier too could someday be a global player.

[MD2]

MD2, my dear, I'm not going to get into a long debate with you. Bean has already pointed out at least one hole in your story and you seem to forget that little item called the recession in the early 90s. That particular recession caused the decline of more than one airline and caused many airlines to cut back their schedules. By the time the economy came back, the airport was in severe decline with no guaranteed future.

And any sense that Air Canada orchestrated the demise of Canadian is folly. CAIL got into trouble with it's purchase of WD and never recovered. Sound familiar to your schooling from Bean? . And it was CAIL that tried to take over Air Canada because AC and its subsidiaries was worth a lot more than its stock reflected.

inchman, you can argue all you want, but facts of only a few years ago speak for themselves. You can draw your own conclusions, and consumers, Toronto city council and mayor, and government agencies will draw theirs based on Air Canada's track record. Air Canada has done it many times before, and unless there are protections, it will do it again. For those that have forgotten or think 13 years is a long time ago, here is the news:

Air Canada's 'Tango' service barely avoids cease-and-desist order

Canada's Competition Bureau said it was about to issue a temporary cease-and-desist order Friday morning that would have effectively shut down Air Canada's new "Tango" discount service but was preempted by the sudden demise of Canada 3000.

Andre Lafond, the deputy commissioner of the federal Competition Bureau, said the bureau investigated and concluded that "Tango was targeted at Canada 3000 and if it was allowed to continue it would cause serious harm to the company (Canada 3000)."

"We were prepared to issue a temporary (cease-and-desist) order this morning," Lafond told CBC Newsworld. "We would have asked Air Canada to stop selling tickets on its Tango routes."

He said the bureau was "disappointed" to learn of Canada 3000's shutdown.

Air Canada denied that Tango was an "anti-competitive weapon" which contributed to Canada 3000's demise.

"It is impossible to see how matching fares can be an uncompetitive act as alleged by the Commissioner," Air Canada executive vice-president Calin Rovinescu said in a release.

He also suggested the Competition Bureau was overstepping its bounds. "The role of the Competition Bureau is to foster competition in the Canadian marketplace, not to support individual competitors," Rovinescu said.

In late October, Canada 3000 CEO Angus Kinnear told a convention of travel agents he would ask the Competition Bureau to examine what he called "Air Canada's onslaught on the marketplace" and declare it illegal.

Air Canada announced its Tango service earlier last month. That service involves the re-deploying of some of its aircraft and personnel to a no-frills discount-fare service. Tango's first flights took off Nov. 1.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/air-canada-s-tango-service-barely-avoids-cease-and-desist-order-1.286849

[MD2]

Air Canada has been looking for slots for years. The Port Authority has already publicly told the lowest cost operator in the market to go pound sand, and in doing so, showing utter contempt to the tax payers they purportedly represent who would undoubtedly prefer to see the publicly owned airport be a driver to lower, not higher transportation costs for the general public.

What door did 9/11 open that was not already open? I can't think of anything WJ did post 9/11 that wasn't already planned well prior to 9/11.

I can say with no small degree of certainty that C3's days were numbered long before 9/11. We knew they'd make it through the summer 2001. It's Canada. It's the summer. Is there anything easier than making money in the airline business in July and August? It was pretty clear they were in big trouble as they tried to fill all that new capacity when seasonal demand wore off, starting in mid August 2001, well ahead of 9/11.

That simply is not true, Canada 3000 had its highest sale on September 10th. Had it not been for September 11th and especially Air Canada's Tango, the airline industry in Canada would be different today, and WestJet may have been a much smaller West Coast low cost. Canada 3000 took the brunt of Air Canada's onslaught, and with its bankruptcy, not only made room for WestJet's growth Eastbound, possibly it also made it more difficult for Air Canada to attack it due to attention that Tango drew from Competition Bureau.

As for Air Canada wanting more slots, isn't it ironic that until Porter started they had all the slots they wanted, but did nothing with them for years and dwindled their traffic from City airport, and bullied the TPA, now all of sudden they want more slots? How can anyone not see this as a clear attempt to muscle out competition? It was only 25 years ago that they did that to City Express, and it was only 13 years ago that they did that to Canada 3000, and on and on....

[Thebean]

I'm sure WS had plans but without the 2nd largest airline in Canada to compete with (competition.....one of your favorite things) they were able to expand without much interference. I don't think Westjet vacations was even a consideration until much later as well.

Much like C3 grew after Wardair and some other smaller players faded away, so did WS. No planning department could have predicted what took place unless you had a crystal ball hidden under a desk.

OF COURSE C3 had it's highest day of sales ever on Sept 10th 2001. They had ballooned from about 15 aircraft into a combined fleet of goodness knows how many once they added CJ and Royal's fleet. They probably had 3x the inventory they had a year earlier. It's a given it would have been a record sales day. Do you really think others can't figure that stuff out, old chap?

WestJet launched into central and eastern Canada in the first half of 2000, though the decision to do so and acquire the necessary aircraft to make it possible was obviously made before the collapse of Cdn in late 1999. In other words, eastern expansion was going to occur with or without Cdn in the market. It's not as if Cdn was able to stop WJ's growth in the BC-Alberta market. We weren't exactly quivering in our space boots at the thought of taking them on further east.

Years are being condensed here. A lot of time passed between the end of Wardair and 2001.

WestJet was doing a nice western Canadian domestic vacation package business long before 9/11. WJ Holidays was operating in the fall of 1996 with packages to Victoria. It was modest, but we were learning the business. It was rebranded as WJ vacations much later on.

WJ didn't have the fleet capacity or network to take on sched US until about 4 years after 9/11. Again, that was by design, not by accident. Sched US and Caribbean didn't get going in a big way 'til about 2005 as the Transat contract wound down, and "big" is hardly the right adjective to describe WJ's international activity in 2005. Like everything WJ did, and continues to do, it was slow and methodical.

Prior to the ill fated 2001 merger between C3, CJ and Royal, C3 was pretty much stuck at about 15 aircraft even after the end of Wardair, what , 10 years earlier and the "others", though I'm not sure who you include in that category. C3 was pretty much incapable of growth during the period WJ was expanding like a weed. It is well known that this drove Kinnear and Leckie nuts and led them to a very stupid decision that cost them their airline.

If what you say is true, there were numerous other airlines out there that should have been able to benefit from the supposed meddling in the affairs of Air Canada. Isn't it odd that no one else managed to figure out how to do so? There were at least 18 months between the defacto collapse of Cdn in late 1999 and September 2001, more than enough time to develop a smart business plan.

To suggest that WJ was given a let as it expanded anywhere over the years is revisionist history. I can think of very few contested markets, if any, where anyone rolled over and played dead.

WJ made the claim we'd never fly east of Manitoba for very specific reasons. It'd be like Costco announcing their intention to open a store in Bentonville 25 years ago. Why wave a red flag in front of an 800lb gorilla? Besides, what would the point be of WJ announcing their intention to fly trans-con when, at the time, the airline didn't really have a true trans-con capable airplane?

It's pretty naïve to assume that a wildly successful, (profitable), airline was going to curtail it's growth. WJ was already in early discussions with Boeing for NG's in late 1997. It was pretty obvious to all involved that we were going to take full advantage of the NG (or Airbus had we gone that direction), range once we had them in our arsenal. We had carefully watched howSW was deploying their warbirds.

WJ was privately held at the time. We could say what we wanted to the media and others in order to obfuscate our true intentions.

It would appear the ruse was successful, given how often that comment is brought up. It kind of reminds me of the indignation expressed by the German General Staff when invasion came at Normandy, when all along every indication was it would be at Calais. How unsporting of the allies to have pulled that off!

That military history degree ended up being quite useful.

[Super 80]

Air Canada

Got any Right Said Fred jokes?

[Briler]

There's no work being done by the City on Porter's jets proposal at this point. The ball's in the Port Authority's court,as City Council unanimously insisted that it agree to caps on the existing operation, and address problems caused by that, before discussing the Porter proposal. That didn't happen.

The Port Authority is trying to create momentum by starting to meet other city requirements, such as a Airport Master Plan, and environmental assessments, and the design for the runway extension. According to the TPA, they will not be completed until Q3 2015.

The Master Plan without jets was released this week. Here's CommunityAIR's press release on that:

Island Airport Master Plan Reveals Fatal

Constraints on Expansion

Facilities Can’t Cope with Existing Volumes

For Immediate Release Tuesday, December 2, 2014

Contact: Brian Iler, Chair

416-835-4384 (cell)

416‑598‑0544 (work direct)

The Toronto Port Authority yesterday released its new “Master Plan” for the Island Airport.

“This isn’t so much a “plan” as a list of unsolvable problems.” said Brian Iler, Chair of CommunityAIR. “Unlike most airports that have ample space on the edge of an urban environment, the Island Airport is severely constrained by the city around it. We remain mystified as to why the TPA and Porter think they can expand at all.”

Here are the problems, set out in the report [our emphasis]:

• Parking is very limited due to a lack of available land. Originally, twenty-six parking stalls were provided at the foot of Bathurst Street (Eireann Quay) at the Arrivals / Departures Curb. However, these were recently removed in order to accommodate the construction of the pedestrian tunnel. A surface lot, identified as short-term parking, is located off of Stadium Rd and accommodates approximately 190 stalls. This lot has been designed to maximize capacity making manoeuvring difficult when the lot is at or near capacity, which is often.
• The terminal was designed to support a planning peak hour passenger (PPHP) capacity of 336 in either the domestic or transborder sector. …Given that the existing terminal is designed to accommodate a peak hour demand of approximately 336 passengers, it is likely that areas of the terminal building already exceed demand during peak periods.
• The area of the combined services building allocated for airport maintenance is comprised of four equipment bays and support areas. This facility is not sufficient to accommodate the full needs of the Airport,
• Given the tight physical constraints of the Airport, particularly in the vicinity of the terminal building, there is no opportunity to provide a centralized de-icing facility.
• With the rapid increase in air carrier activity over the past two years and the allocation of all of the 202 slots available for scheduled air carriers, it is very likely that BBTCA has reached its theoretical capacity of 140,703 movements. Even with modest (1-2%) growth in the other general aviation sectors, the TPA may have to implement measures next year to manage aviation activities
• At a length of approximately 60m, the drop-off/pick-up curb at the ferry terminus is significantly undersized as compared to airports with comparable passenger activity. As comparison, the following is a list of similar Canadian Airports, including the number of annual passengers and the length of their terminal curb-side:

Kelowna Airport: 1.3 million annual passengers, curb length of 122m,

Saskatoon Airport: 1.3 million annual passengers, curb length of 150m, and

Victoria Airport: 1.4 million annual passengers, curb length of 200m.

• The provision of public parking is significantly undersized given the level of passenger activity. Industry planning guidelines suggest a provision of approximately 1,000 – 3,000 parking stalls per 1 million enplaned passengers. With approximately 1.5 million passengers, the unrestrained demand for parking at BBTCA would be approximately 750 – 2,000 parking stalls.
• The current capacity of the two taxi queuing lanes is approximately thirty-four vehicles, which during peak periods is at over-capacity. As a result, taxis often stand on the northbound curb lane of Eireann Quay, which presents a significant congestion and safety concern. …As a result, the TPA is left with an overall taxi system that has far more demand than capacity, and is without any realistic short-term and cost effective mitigating solutions.

“And these constraints don’t begin to consider the concerns of waterfront residents and users directly affected by the Airport’s traffic, noise and pollution.” added Iler. “The TPA has ignored the City’s April 1 requirement for robust public and stakeholder input into all planning exercises, including this Master Plan. There was none.”

[blues deville]

And these constraints dont begin to consider the concerns of waterfront residents and users directly affected by the Airports traffic, noise and pollution. added Iler.

You and your friends are hilarious. Stand at the corner of Bathhurst & Lakeshore with your back to the city and tell me if you can hear, smell or breath anything related to the airport.

[Briler]

Actually, a noise study carried out by the TPA clearly identify airport noise levels distinct from other noise, at unacceptable levels. Depending on winds and atmospheric conditions, of course. Porter's engine maintenance run-ups, often occurring on otherwise quiet weekends, are particularly obnoxious. They need to be carried out elsewhere than in the midst of a residential community and Toronto's prime recreational area.

[CanadaEH]

Actually, a noise study carried out by the TPA clearly identify airport noise levels distinct from other noise, at unacceptable levels. Depending on winds and atmospheric conditions, of course. Porter's engine maintenance run-ups, often occurring on otherwise quiet weekends, are particularly obnoxious. They need to be carried out elsewhere than in the midst of a residential community and Toronto's prime recreational area.

Maybe you shouldn't have chosen to move beside an airport.

[acsidestick]

BD,

Our company has an agreement with the Westin that we are to be faced North or more usually East facing the floating seafood boat. A few times this past summer, I was given a harbour facing room. As I was working the nights, I needed to get major sleep in the day. Every single Q400 every couple of minutes refused to whisper as It went by, and made sleep without earplugs impossible.

They may not have the bark of an Otter on floats, but they are far from the non intrusive silenced wonders some profess them to be.

[blues deville]

BD,

Our company has an agreement with the Westin that we are to be faced North or more usually East facing the floating seafood boat. A few times this past summer, I was given a harbour facing room. As I was working the nights, I needed to get major sleep in the day. Every single Q400 every couple of minutes refused to whisper as It went by, and made sleep without earplugs impossible.

They may not have the bark of an Otter on floats, but they are far from the non intrusive silenced wonders some profess them to be.

I think the "Q" part of the 400 is a reference to the noise cancelling system in the cabin, unfortunately PW hasn't done the same with their engines.

Too bad about losing out on a good sleep but any hotel located next to an airport will be subject to some noise. My airline's YVR hotel for layovers is under the 08R/26L centerline and all you hear, day and night, is jets and turbo props.

When the Norwegian airforce were doing circuits at YTZ, the biggest hotel was the Royal York on Front Street. But I doubt anyone complained about their engine noise.

Your company selected that hotel but anyone who chooses to live on the Toronto harbour front should be prepared for all kinds of sounds. It's a city. It's going to be noisy. And there have been turbo props using YTZ since the late 70's.

[Briler]

Maybe you shouldn't have chosen to move beside an airport.

In fact, there's an agreement that was put in place to protect the residential neighbourhood, that requires aircraft to comply with these noise restraints: Lateral: 83.5 db, Approach 92 db, measured per ICAO. The Q400 breaches both - Lateral:84.0, and Approach 93.1, per Transport Canada. Decibels are logarithmic, meaning a small overage results in a large effective noise increase. It is such breaches of the rules that so rankles residents and recreational users. Essentially, Porter relies on the lack of enforcement backbone at the City to get away with this stuff.

[DEFCON]

I just don't understand the complaints over the airport. I mean, the people living in downtown Toronto live in a super congested, dirty, smelly and sometimes dangerous environment that's so noisy, at least at, or near street level, that I can't imagine anyone ever hearing the Q400's regardless of phase of flight. I'll give that on the odd morning when everything is dead quiet; i.e., before 600 am, the aircraft might be heard at takeoff power? Then again; some of the other single engine planes around there could put turbojet aircraft to shame.

[boestar]

I live 32 km from Pearson and if someone were to do ground runs at full power on a 727, I can hear it if my bedroom window is open. It's not loud or intrusive but I can hear it.

Sound travels further at night and there is less background noise.

[rudder]

The new mayor has recused himself from the entire CYTZ debate.

With no advocate in the chair, it will be an uphill battle for any proposals to modify status quo agreements.

[MD2]

I just don't understand the complaints over the airport. I mean, the people living in downtown Toronto live in a super congested, dirty, smelly and sometimes dangerous environment that's so noisy, at least at, or near street level, that I can't imagine anyone ever hearing the Q400's regardless of phase of flight. I'll give that on the odd morning when everything is dead quiet; i.e., before 600 am, the aircraft might be heard at takeoff power? Then again; some of the other single engine planes around there could put turbojet aircraft to shame.

Although there is a very strict curfew at Toronto City airport and no movements allowed after 11:00 PM or before 6:45 AM.

Again, discriminate against the noise, not its source. Trying to persuade aviation folks that airplanes are bad and noisy is likely a futile pursuit, but in the case of the noise of the C series aircraft not founded in facts either.

[vikingwarrior]

If Porter and the TPA think they are going to build a wall along Queens Quay to supress the noise from BB....there Jets scheme is toast!

Jet proposal for island airport draws hostile crowd at environmental assessment meeting

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/12/09/jet_proposal_for_island_airport_draws_hostile_crowd_at_environmental_assessment_meeting.html