I just flew into Toronto Pearson from London, and like nearly all Air Canada overseas flights, I landed in the newly built infield terminal. The infield terminal is nice, but why is it there? And why is it so far away from the new Terminal 1, which itself is brand-spankingly new? I guess I'm just wondering why international visitors can't fit in the new Terminal 1 yet when we just built it, and what the future plans hold for the infield terminal? The buses that connect the infield terminal and customs is so long and uncomfortable that it's embarrassing. Isn't new Terminal 1 undercapacity too?

cause pier f is u/c

In all respects, the infield terminal beat the old terminal by a mile and a half.

Remember: they are rebuilding a new international airport over an existing one, and maintaining service neat trick, to be certain!

If I were king and dictator, I 'd scrap the Pickering project and sell the land for development -- or have the GTA develop it BUT NOT AS AN AIRPORT! Use the money from the development in Picering to pay for Pearson, reducing the loopy landing fees-- now, that's freaking smart!

I think the infield airport are for stopovers for long international flights; flights that just need to land to gather more stuff and clean up; I don't think anyone gets off or on.

No, I got off at the infield terminal, as Toronto was my final destination. And then got bussed up to customs.

^ Yes, I believe it is temporary for all non-US international flights. Its been that way for a while. I can't remember the exact details but I believe its not a permanent arrangement. Why? You don't like taxiing another 10 minutes, + the additional 15 minute bus ride to the main terminal?

If I were king and dictator, I 'd scrap the Pickering project and sell the land for development -- or have the GTA develop it BUT NOT AS AN AIRPORT! Use the money from the development in Picering to pay for Pearson, reducing the loopy landing fees-- now, that's freaking smart!

Here Here! Don't need a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Can I ask why you flew to Toronto from London? london, ontario right...it's only an hour and a half away.... :eek2:

I live in London (the real one), and am visiting friends and family here in Toronto. There are actually flights that fly out of Toronto to London, ON (Air Canada Jazz I believe).

I know Air Canada had London to London on a 767 in the summer months in the past -- not sure they still do. I think it was twice a week flight, not certain.

Air Canada's set up a Heathrow is HUGE -- I think it's 4th, after Pearson, Vancouver and Montreal. A good chunk of Terminal 3 at LHR is dedicated to Air Canada.

I used the Infield Terminal in June when I went to Newark NJ so its not just non-US flights.

I too just arrived at Pearson, and i have to admit that i am not impressed at all! I honestly think that this project is badly conceived, badly designed and about as generic as anything out there! This building could be anywhere-it just happens to be here.

After, arriving at I would have to say is a joke of a terminal, regardless of its use, and then being inefficiently bussed to the Main Terminal, i have to admit that i was apalled by how garbage the terminal is. There were baseboard heaters lining the walls. Everything was white with absolutely no life or atmosphere. It was like a waiting room at a doctors office. The buildings massive expanse is useless, firstly because you are insignificant in comparison to the space and secondly, because there is no one there- my flight was 1 of 4 that had arrived and it was as if the world had just ended and we were survivors!

The quality of materials-generally, is horrible! Everything is white-there is no colour anywhere and there is carpetting. There is no greenery or anything alive, besides other passengers. One has the feeling of being in germless room! I am disgusted to think that they spent so much money on this sub-par architecture! Honestly!!

What we have is an airport which is mediocre at best- exactly what Toronto loves..everything that is mediocre and well, at best okay!! Why strive and create great spaces, when okay will do just fine!!

Toronto-the city that works! 1980-90's

Toronto-the city of mediocrity! 2003-infinite

p5

sigh,

I love it how people only look at the picture to make their point

while I agree, the Airport is um...white, it is a beautiful building especially at dusk.

AND lets remember, it is not completed. It is maybe 60% complete, when it is finished I'm sure it will be an amazing facility

I for one am impressed!

The infield terminal at T1-New at YYZ is currently used temporarily to serve Air Canada (International, non-US) and Star Alliance (except United Airlines) flights until Pier F (currently underconstruction) is finished at T1-New. After that, T2 will be decommissioned and all flights operating there will be moved to T1. The infield terminal will then only serve any overflow capacity and will not be used on a regular basis.

Air Canada's setup at Heathrow didn't seem that impressive to me. They only fly to seven cities. Air Canada's only flying to London from Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, Vancouver, Ottawa and Halifax/St. John's. Surely Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, and Winnipeg have more of a presence than Heathrow. I can't imagine that there'd be enough demand in London ON for flights to England. True about the mediocrity of the new T-1. It's nice and much better than before, but it's like any other airport. CDG, that's a great airport!

flying to every city in Canada wouldn't make much business sense.

That is what connections are for, fly to YYZ then take an AC Jazz flight to London, ON

I'm sure if you are in Hethrow, you can always find your way home...

Though T1 is quite sterile and bland it is still a really nice terminal. It reminds me of a much smaller version of the HK airport.

GTAA money woes????

Simple, set up a nice casino in the airport. All proceedings would pay for and support the airports plans.

Actually, the building uses far more grey than white. Grey is the ultimate neutral colour because it includes all the other colours.

The 'atmosphere' is provided by the people who use the terminal, not by the building itself. I don't know about you guys, but the last thing I want in an airport is visual clutter, or high fashion 'decorator' colours that will have to be changed every few years, or too many garish signs, or low ceilings and a feeling of being enclosed. Here, the designers kept clutter to an absolute minimum and went for a clean, neutral, airy design with high ceilings that promote calmness. This approach ought to pay dividends once the building is used at, or near, capacity.

I enjoy the gentle arcs of the building ... the floor plan and the curved ceiling. Whenever I travel to England I use the automatic check-in machines, and I found the building comprehensible the first time I used it. The signage is clear and I've never been lost there. Arrivals, and passing through the huge open area with the baggage carousels, is an entertainment in itself. You waltz through it, knowing you're almost home. If I have one criticism of the place it is that there aren't enough vertical connections between the floors.

Air Canada's setup at Heathrow didn't seem that impressive to me. They only fly to seven cities. Air Canada's only flying to London from Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, Vancouver, Ottawa and Halifax/St. John's.

Canada is lucky! Here in the US we are constricted by the almighty "Bermuda II" treaty, which basically means that cities like Atlanta, Houston, Dallas-Ft Worth, and Minneapolis-St Paul can't have any flights into close in Heathrow airport, but instead have to fly into Gatwick airport. While you can fly from Calgary, Ottawa and even Halifax to London's Heathrow airport. And, even if you are flying from a US city that can have flights into Heathrow, the only two US airlines that can fly there are United and American. Now that royally sucks!

Free and open skies between the US and UK!!

Because the competition is closer I guess, the US and UK have had to restrict the flight pairs into Heathrow. And really, it's not that much farther into Gatwick, although getting into the city, you can't take only the Underground.

Gatwick, Heathrow, and even Stanstead have express trains linking the airports to the city.
Toronto? Not even close!

Gatwick, Heathrow, and even Stanstead have express trains linking the airports to the city.
Toronto? Not even close!

Yeah, that is strange that a city with such an excellent public transport system like Toronto would have no train to Pearson. When I used to visit Toronto regularly and ride the subway, I'd always look on the subway map and hope to see that the western end of the Bloor line would have the famous "dotted" tracks to an "Airport" station, with a sign saying "line to Airport under construction." :)

The Airport Rocket bus 192 isn't too bad, for now, I guess. It's better than the old Airport Express coach that people used to have to take, and pay lots for. What's going on with the Union to Airport line?

Babel...

I agree, that there is nothing worse than clutter, which only distracts and detracts from the architecture. Yet, i do not entirely agree that the people create the atmoshpere, they definately add to it, but the architecture should, in the first place promote it. I personally feel that there was very little imagination put into this airport.

Yes, it has lofty, airy spaces, arching steel trusses and slits in its skin to allow light in, but you are overwhelmed by the sheer size of the space, and there is nothing in it!!! What is the purpose of such a space?? I do mean for them to have low lying ceilings, but there are no threes inside which would signify the reason for such high ceilings- besides the columns holding up the roof, and the few ants getting their baggage, the space is a vacuous void-!

Why not add some greenery, some maple trees (i dont know) bamboo bushes, colours in the form of plants and flowers...some pictures on the walls, i mean christ what is so inviting about a giant white-washed room-it is all so bland and mediocre...so purely canadian!!

p5

"it is all so bland and mediocre...so purely canadian!! "

Don't you think you are getting a little carried away in your little airport critique???







KGB

I know how to fill it: REDUCE FEES! Fill it with airlines and passengers!