Hey guys, what is your favorite airport in Canada?

I would say Vancouver. Even though I like Toronto's, it really isn't very creative or innovative.

Toronto's nice, and its scale is just stunning. But Ottawa's just as beautifully new and on a much more human scale. No chaos around it. Once I'm there, it's great, but I literally dread flying in and out of Pearson. Ottawa's less crowded, easier to get there, and more compact.

The new terminal 1 in Tor. is beautiful, spacious and nice and clean, customer friendly and high tech.

Vancouver Airport is the best and second to that would be Toronto


YVR
http://peterchow.com/photos/Panoramic/Vancouver/vancouver-airport-park.jpg
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/transport/images/59B.jpg
http://www.apeg.bc.ca/branches/seatosky/images/yvr-tour3.JPG
http://www.d-w-d.com/r0800/images/projects/YVR-Pacific-Passage-200x157.jpg
http://www.cysys.net/images/new_images/project_pics/yvr.jpg

YVR has a innovative and cultural design....the new Toronto airport is nice but it's just bland - white. nothing original, just another white airport though i would personally say one of the best white airports around.

Anybody got any close-up pics of Calgary and Trudeau in Montreal? Those seem like the contenders, along with Toronto-Pearson and Vancouver, of course.

Here are some of YYC:

http://www.calgaryairport.com//fts/getfile.cfm?FID=3095

LOL I love this guy!!!
http://www.calgaryairport.com/fts/getfile.cfm?FID=3097

http://www.calgaryairport.com/fts/getfile.cfm?FID=3099

http://www.calgaryairport.com/fts/getfile.cfm?FID=3101

http://www.calgaryairport.com/fts/getfile.cfm?FID=3103

EDIT: Some more!

http://www.aaa.ab.ca/pages/public/images/csaa/07-a.jpg http://www.aaa.ab.ca/pages/public/images/csaa/07-b.jpg http://www.aaa.ab.ca/pages/public/images/csaa/07-c.jpg

Toronto's new terminal 1 is the mother of all Canadian terminals...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/filipv/NewTerminal4.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/filipv/NewTerminal18.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/filipv/NewTerminal12.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/filipv/NewTerminal7.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/filipv/aerial3.jpg

The completed terminal 1 - 2008
http://images.toronto.com/feature/324/Aerial-All-Green.jpg

Terminal 3
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/filipv/Terminal3.jpg

Yuck, this is the first time I've actually seen pics of the new terminal. It has a cool shape and everything, but it is SOOOOO bland. Someone inject some color please!

I've got to admit though, that is one large mother!

Yuck, this is the first time I've actually seen pics of the new terminal. It has a cool shape and everything, but it is SOOOOO bland. Someone inject some color please!

I've got to admit though, that is one large mother!
I'd take functionality and size over colour any time.:cheers:

I like Calgarys a lot, the inside looks really cozy, but the outside looks old. Torontos is too big and open spacey inside that it looks too roomy. Vancouver is the way to go on this one, beautiful inside and out.

Don't get me wrong here. I like size and functionality probably as much as you do, but they could have done a MUCH better job as far as interior decoration goes.

The exterior is great though.

EDIT: That was in response to Filip.

The interior decoration is actually really nice, the thing is these pics are taken in the check-in area. The other levels have some really neat pieces of artwork. The Greater Toronto Airports authority apparently spent a lot of money on art for this terminal.

I've been through Canada's three largest airports (YYZ, YVR and YUL), and I would have to say that even though I am a Montrealer, Vancouver's airport is by far the best in Canada, if not, North America.

OK, I only know Pearson, but I can tell you this --- the old Terminal 1 put Pearson at the bottom of the list -- it was dilapidated -- badly maintained: it looked like a terminal in some 3rd world country, an embarrassment to this country.
This new terminal is a VAST and DRAMATIC improvement, in every conceivable way.

Ok really when I go to a city, I don’t stop and look at the beautiful architecture in the stinking airport. Like really who cares, you go there to see the city or to do your business trip, or to see family or whatever. You don’t go to an airport to see all the pretty pictures and designs. On that note I like Tuktyuktuks airport. it’s small efficient and it gets the job done.

‘Toronto’s airport isn’t that bad sure it doesn’t have a lot of fancy colors but it has a high-tech future look to it. That’s kinda cool.

I have to agree about Old Terminal 1. It looked less like an airport and more like a concrete bunker. I believe the plan calls for the airport to also demolish terminal two and extend the new terminal 1.

Treebeard: When most people travel to a city, the first thing they see is the airport. And that is a really big first impression. If an airport looks bland, that is going to carry with them their whole trip. That is especially true of flights using the airport as a hub, where a lot of the time all travelers will see is the terminal.

I agree that the high-tech look is REALLY cool, but at the same time it seems very sterile and cold. What this terminal needs is to inject some real character into that environment.

At the same time I would say that Calgary's airport definitely needs some work on the exterior. You've gotta love that raptor though!

The interior decoration is actually really nice, the thing is these pics are taken in the check-in area. The other levels have some really neat pieces of artwork. The Greater Toronto Airports authority apparently spent a lot of money on art for this terminal.

Yes Filip, they sure did. Airlines and passengers flying into Toronto will soon be flying into the most expensive airport in the world. I'm talking about the fees that are charged each time a plane lands at Pearson. Soon to be the highest in the world!! And passengers who use Pearson will foot the bill!

For more info see the thread on Pearson in the "Airports" subforum: Here's a link Toronto's Pearson Airport (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=151388)

Anyone have pics of Trudeau in Montreal? Especially since it became the international and domestic airport for Montreal.

I like Terminal 1's "blandness" :D

I like Vancouver's airport busy atmosphere, like there's always something going on ~ best customer service in Canada for me.

Calgary's interior is nice, but too quiet sometimes.

Toronto's is a very big improvement from before, but don't like its blandness & I somewhat resent footing its heavy bill.

Vancouver airport will be expanding to a 25 million capacity by 2013 from 16 million today with a $1.4 billion expansion project, some of which went toward building a airport spur rapid transit line and mostly a expanded internatoinal and domestic terminals and other facilities.

Don't get me wrong here. I like size and functionality probably as much as you do, but they could have done a MUCH better job as far as interior decoration goes.

The exterior is great though.

EDIT: That was in response to Filip.

Would a few planters suit you? A stuffed moose? How about a granite pool full of perch?

If the floating cubes at pearson terminal 1 aren't enough colour for ya then I don't know what is.

Thats the first time Iv seen the new TO terminal I like it but it is bland and very generic. Of course its a million times better then the old terminal the airport in Cancun was almost better then Toronto's old terminal.

Vancouvers Airport is just as modern as Torontos, but when you get off the plane you know that your in Vancouver. YVR is Canada's second largest airport by number of passengers and its expanding with a plan that incluedes a new anouther terminal, a hanger for westjet and it will be the first airport in Canada (second on the west coast of N.A) to have a rapid transit link to downtown and the suburbs.

I chose Calgary because IMO it has the widest variety of services offered. I find in most airports (esp. YYZ, YUL, and TOW) that every 50 metres there is another Relay newspaper stand, Toast coffee bar, and either Swiss Chalet, Second Cup or a random airport-government-style cafe. In Calgary there is everything, such as Chilis (American chain) and good shopping too - I have heard of people heading to the airport for that reason alone. Vancouver is also good, with its 7-11, Roots, etc. but it took a while to fill in.

Architecturally I prefer Pearson with YVR being a close second, but what makes the airport experience for me is having a variety of services, at decent prices (Calgary is great for this), available throughout the airport. Pearson, eat your heart out.

More Pearson

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/IMG_6184.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/IMG_3092.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/IMG_3084.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/IMG_3116.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/IMG_3094.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/IMG_3081.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/IMG_3358_copy.jpg


The thing isnt even close to being completed yet either, the main pier is still underconstruction so keep that in mind.

Thats the first time Iv seen the new TO terminal I like it but it is bland and very generic. Of course its a million times better then the old terminal the airport in Cancun was almost better then Toronto's old terminal.

Vancouvers Airport is just as modern as Torontos, but when you get off the plane you know that your in Vancouver. YVR is Canada's second largest airport by number of passengers and its expanding with a plan that incluedes a new anouther terminal, a hanger for westjet and it will be the first airport in Canada (second on the west coast of N.A) to have a rapid transit link to downtown and the suburbs.

YVR could pass for the Orangutan pavillian at the Toronto metro zoo. Very cheesy.

When most people travel to a city, the first thing they see is the airport. And that is a really big first impression. If an airport looks bland, that is going to carry with them their whole trip. That is especially true of flights using the airport as a hub, where a lot of the time all travelers will see is the terminal.

That's so lame... those have gotta be some pretty pretencious and picky travellers!! Ever been to ADRoma or countless other poor-first-impression airports? Hardly indicative of the city!!

Vancouver's and Calgary's airports look nice enough although those displays are just a tad cheesy... a Raptor stepping over luggage? Throw that sort of thing on the main strip of Niagara Falls, ON and it would fit right in.

YYC (Calgary) is now the 3rd busiest airport in Canada, and one of the busiest for cargo...8.2 million passengers a year (YVR is about 14 million, and TO is currently about 24 million)...and all these airports are undergoing big expansion plans - Calgary increasing to handle 16 million a year (its also the fastest growing hub in Canada - doubling capacity in the past 9 years since "Open Skies")....keep in mind though, this pales in comparison to Atlanta's 71 million passenger capacity (the busiest in the world)!

Regardless "best" isn't about the biggest...I'm in YVR and YYC every week, they are very similar in feel. If you fly Air Canada (gate A) in YYC - there's not a lot though. No restaurant at all...just a T Horton's and Toast! cafe (and Air Canada Lounge of course). The new Westjet wing is MUCH better, with Chili's, Milestones, Starbucks, and a food court. The main area is really nice as well, and out of all the airports in the country, has the best view - the view is facing south-west into the skyline and mountains. There is a good amount of services in YYC as well - especially given the size of the city. BTW - I don't find those displays cheesy - it is great displays for tourism.

YVR does have a slight edge though in terms of restaurant selection - the domestic terminal is full of services, and a couple restaurants, and the Air Canada (gate C), and Westjet (gate B) - shared by a walkway - have quite a few services as well (and of course, lots of Starbucks). The international terminal is equally as nice.

The best part though is it is ALL in one building - the last time I was flying to TO every week, it was a pain to get around (flying into Terminal 2)...and the building looked like a bomb-shelter. The new Terminal looked amazingly large from the windows in Terminal 2...but....

To me its about functionality, and I can't comment yet on Pearson's new one (I used to wait up to an hour for my bags in TO)...but YVR and YYC are equally nice facilities.

BTW - Toronto's new tower is considered the most high-tech tower in the world...but a lot of airlines are balking at GTAA wanting to up those airport fees to pay for all that glitz!

Pearson is so cool.
I hung out there for a few hours on my way to and from New Brunswick.
I didn't want to leave the airport...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/IMG_3116.jpg
That is the worst paint job ever, is that suppost to be art? Iv seen elephants paint better.

Has anyone else been to Ottawa's new airport terminal?

I did not know that Calgary had passed Dorval. I thought I saw a thread that said Dorval celebrated its 10 millionth passenger?

Check it out...Calgary Airport Authority/Calgary media has been boasting it for the past year - just barely beats out YUL, but considering the size of Calgary and how quickly the CAA has grown - its impressive. Meanwhile, TO and Van have lost passengers (likely still from SARS).

http://www.aci-na.org/docs/2003%20Passenger%20Rankings.xls

In terms of "total movements", YUL is even further behind - ranked 61 (Calgary 55, and YVR 37). Toronto - though Canada's busiest (ranked 24th) is barely 1/3 of what Chicago or Atlanta is!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/gf_curtis/IMG_3116.jpg
That is the worst paint job ever, is that suppost to be art? Iv seen elephants paint better.
That's modern art btw, and I bet you're not educated enough to appreciate it. You appreciate cheesy displays of canoes and hanging vines at an airport. As Brian in Ont said, it could easily be mistaken for a zoo or something.

Yes, and Toronto's can easily be mistaken for an art Gallery:|

Toronto's is simple yet elegant, Vancouver's is nice don't get me wrong but a bit overdone with all the monuments and weird ass statues.

So I guess nobody on this thread was able to scrounge up some pics of Trudeau Airport in Montreal?

Not overdone at all! Its not like every corner you run into one, there is like 5.

That's modern art btw, and I bet you're not educated enough to appreciate it. You appreciate cheesy displays of canoes and hanging vines at an airport. As Brian in Ont said, it could easily be mistaken for a zoo or something.

That? Modern..art? Nope no appreciation here. I also saw an elephant paint better than that, it was on the news the other night in fact...

YVR a bit overdone??? Hmmm...YVR and YYC are both open, and comfortable to spend time in - can't imagine them any better.

If JDPowers recent rankings of airports is any indication, Calgary was tied for first (with San Antonio) in the "Small" sized airport category (under 10m passengers) for Customer Satisfaction. Vancouver and Pearson were both ranked in the "Medium" sized airports (between 10m and 30m a year) - Vancouver ranking better than average, and Pearson "falls below average". Singapore ranked the best among medium-sized airports.

YVR is far from overdone. there are a few very valuable first nations art displays and there is an art gallery somewhere.....the interior design of the airport is an original in the world, really shows the west coast.

I don't think the airport in a city is the end all and be all but its does leave a first impression. I remember having friends arrive from Manchester (amazing airport there) into Terminal 2 and they said to me God, I hope your city is better than your airport. I was a bit embarrassed by Terminal 2 but at least the new terminal is an improvement. Its big, white and BIG. Ottawa's is comfortable and attractive as is Calgary. But the queen of airports at least is Vancouver. People always comment on it being up there in world terms not just Canadian. It doesn't seem so much like an airport and I think thats why people like it. The waterfall when you arrive and wait in line at customs is actually a nice touch.

The random displays of first nation artworks around YVR just isn't my cup of tea. I prefer the huge megalomaniac terminals that offer you a lot of breathing room. Therefore Toronto's will always be my favourite, it's a great way to enter Canada's largest and most important financial city; entering into Canada's largest and most expensive terminal. YVR is cute, for a smaller airport. Something along those lines at YYZ just wouldn't work out.

That? Modern..art? Nope no appreciation here. I also saw an elephant paint better than that, it was on the news the other night in fact...
I guess you're due for a trip to your local art museum, does Edmonton even have one?

I guess you're due for a trip to your local art museum, does Edmonton even have one?
Ahh, yes it does. However, it is dated and too small to host most of the art work. In fact, most of the works are in storage. Buuut, a new museum is in the works and is supposed to be announced sometimes in 2005.

The random displays of first nation artworks around YVR just isn't my cup of tea. I prefer the huge megalomaniac terminals that offer you a lot of breathing room. Therefore Toronto's will always be my favourite, it's a great way to enter Canada's largest and most important financial city; entering into Canada's largest and most expensive terminal. YVR is cute, for a smaller airport. Something along those lines at YYZ just wouldn't work out.


Before the upgrade, it wasnt nearly as big as now was it? considering it is still a medium sized airport even if the actual size of the upgrades is big.

Before the upgrade, it wasnt nearly as big as now was it? considering it is still a medium sized airport even if the actual size of the upgrades is big.

the 1996 expansion and upgrade made the airport three times bigger.....and better.

the 1996 expansion and upgrade made the airport three times bigger.....and better.


You do mean the toronto airport right? thats what i was referring too.

canada cowboy, you are wrong. Montreal-Trudeau Airport is the 3rd busiest airport in Canada. Montreal-Mirabel airport was closed to all passenger traffic in November 2004. Montreal was, and still is, the #3 market after Vancouver and Toronto. Now, all 10 million passengers per year will be going through Trudeau!

Vancouver's is cute, but considering the Hammerhead pier alone (not the main terminal) which is now undercontruction, is bigger than most airport terminals, T1 wins hands down.

The scale, design and attention to detail is unmatched in Canada if not all of North America. If you have actually been in this building and you didn't vote for it.. you were going to vote for your home team no matter what.

Sure they could add a few plants and totem poles. Maybe later.

Calgary is still #3 in Canada - dude, check the link I provided above...unless Dorval added over 2 million people during 2004, it doesn't handle more. Also, as mentioned Mirabel closed in Nov - so the passenger count included Mirabel up to that point. No need to argue it - just look at the link...

To all those TOers that think their airport is sooooo big, and YVR "cute"(?) - keep in mind, TO is still considered a "medium" sized airport, the same as YVR...YVR's passenger count is about 14.5 million, and TO's is about 24 million. Those folks living south of us in places like Chicago and Atlanta would simply laugh at your comments..

It may be too late to affect the polling, but here are two diagrams of Montreal's Trudeau Airport.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v414/Nick_in_Atlanta/Montreal-TrudeauAirport-Presentandfuture.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v414/Nick_in_Atlanta/Montreal-TrudeauAirport-Presentandfuture-Aerialdiagram.gif

To all those TOers that think their airport is sooooo big, and YVR "cute"(?) - keep in mind, TO is still considered a "medium" sized airport, the same as YVR...YVR's passenger count is about 14.5 million, and TO's is about 24 million. Those folks living south of us in places like Chicago and Atlanta would simply laugh at your comments..

Toronto is in the top 30 for the world, that is infact "big" not as big as Chicago, Atlanta, but is one the busiest airports in the world...YYZ is also expected to double in passengers from 25million to 50 million by 2020

Toronto maybe busier, but Montreal gets the Air France A380 in 2007!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v414/Nick_in_Atlanta/A380-VirtualviewofA380atairport-NonA-Netpic.jpg

Toronto is in the top 30 for the world, that is infact "big" not as big as Chicago, Atlanta, but is one the busiest airports in the world...YYZ is also expected to double in passengers from 25million to 50 million by 2020

Regardless, its still ranked as a "medium" sized airport. As far as increasing to 50 million...yeah, we'll see. When Mirabel opened in Montreal, their 50 year growth plan was to reach some 40 million passengers. TO has lost passengers in the last couple years, and will likely continue to if GTAA keeps increasing airport fees/landing fees to maintain all that glitz. BTW - YVR's 20 year plan is to also increase to over 30 million, and Calgary expects to hit 20 million by the same year...we'll see if any of those actually happen. Anyhow, YYZ fell below the average grade for medium sized airports last year - where YVR and YYC both were above average (YYC being ranked best in the "Small" category).

I also want to point out the Airport Council International hasn't released figures for 2004 - so yet to see what actually happened at YUL...but if their press release is accurate, and they've experienced a 16% change - that would only put YUL at about 9 million for the year. Still though, it does appear that it may nudge back into 3rd busiest in Canada for 2004...which was Calgary's title in 2003. Considering Calgary has seen well over 100% growth since Open Skies - its impressive.

@Canada cowboy: When I was looking for those diagrams of Trudeau airport, I did read that the Montreal Airport Authority (something like that) had handled 10 million passengers in 2004, but since Mirabel didn't close until late in 2004, their traffic must have been added in, meager as it was. In 2005, that traffic will all be at Trudeau and if they continue at the present rate they should hit 10 million passengers. Would that beat Calgary? Even if it does, I think that Calgary's airport will see much more growth than Trudeau will, in the next few years. Montreal's airport(s) seem to be stagnating for some reason, while much of the aviation growth seems to be occurring in western Canada.

Montreal currently is the 3rd busiest airport.

Oh, and by the way, Montreal-Trudeau airport is also the FASTEST growing major airport in Canada...growing faster than Calgary, Toronto, and Vancouver. This stuff about stagnation is untrue. Growth WAS stangnant for almost 20 years though...but since the consolidation of all flights at Trudeau Airport, growth has increased...not because of the move, but because of growing market. If one looks at the growth rate for Montreal, you will find that we are growing at about 16% over last year, faster than any other major Canadian market.

What's your source?

What's your source?

http://www.admtl.com

Go to the statistics page. It will show you stats for Trudeau Airport, Mirabel Airport, and the two airports combined.

Calgary is still #3 in Canada - dude, check the link I provided above...unless Dorval added over 2 million people during 2004, it doesn't handle more. Also, as mentioned Mirabel closed in Nov - so the passenger count included Mirabel up to that point. No need to argue it - just look at the link...

To all those TOers that think their airport is sooooo big, and YVR "cute"(?) - keep in mind, TO is still considered a "medium" sized airport, the same as YVR...YVR's passenger count is about 14.5 million, and TO's is about 24 million. Those folks living south of us in places like Chicago and Atlanta would simply laugh at your comments..


Sorry, but Calgary is #4. I read that Calgary was #3 until I did more research. It turned out that Calgary as #3 was just another urban legend.

http://www.admtl.com

Go to the statistics page. It will show you stats for Trudeau Airport, Mirabel Airport, and the two airports combined.

I couldn't find a "statistics" page, but I did find an article where I had originally gotten the info that Airports of Montreal had handled 10 million passengers, and it also stated that this was a growth of 16%. There was no data comparing this to other Canadian airports.

Montreal airport is growing so fast because of Mirabel closure. The growth is short term.

Sorry, but Calgary is #4. I read that Calgary was #3 until I did more research. It turned out that Calgary as #3 was just another urban legend.

buddy - You obviously missed the link, and don't want to go back - so here:

http://www.aci-na.org/docs/2003%20Passenger%20Rankings.xls

In fact, you'll also see YMX (Mirabel) down the list...Montreal is 47th and Calgary is 44th...these numbers are for 2003, as 2004 haven't been released.

Here is the link showing JDPowers Global Airport Satisfaction Index - of which Calgary tied for 1st...Toronto didn't even come close for medium sized airports.

http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2004197

^^ YYZ is still underconstrution, and still using a piece of sh*t terminal which will which will be torn down in a couple years...the growth rate is also going up after rebounded from the blackout and SARS etc.

You do mean the toronto airport right? thats what i was referring too.

oh. well anyway, YVR did triple its size with the '96 expansion. that was just Phase I - expanding to 16,000,000. Phase II is from now until 2013 to 25,000,000 and 30 million+ by 2025 including a fourth runway by filling the ocean.

Montreal airport is growing so fast because of Mirabel closure. The growth is short term.

That is wrong. Look at the combined numbers for both airports. The growth is 16% regardless of the move because it is the combined numbers. These numbers are for Montreal as a whole. Anyone who states that Trudeau experienced a 16% growth rate because of the closure of Mirabel doesn't know what they are talking about.

@Canada cowboy: When I was looking for those diagrams of Trudeau airport, I did read that the Montreal Airport Authority (something like that) had handled 10 million passengers in 2004, but since Mirabel didn't close until late in 2004, their traffic must have been added in, meager as it was. In 2005, that traffic will all be at Trudeau and if they continue at the present rate they should hit 10 million passengers. Would that beat Calgary? Even if it does, I think that Calgary's airport will see much more growth than Trudeau will, in the next few years. Montreal's airport(s) seem to be stagnating for some reason, while much of the aviation growth seems to be occurring in western Canada.

Yep - I agree...as mentioned, numbers aren't in for 2004, but I suspect if they've seen that growth at Trudeau, it will edge out Calgary for 2004...not sure what Calgary's growth was for the past year, but it slowed a bit in the past couple. It really is a small market as well - and for any Canadian city, there is only so much need for a "hub"...TO is no doubt "Canada's" hub - but Calgary has established itself as a hub in the west (Air Canada makes their base in
Calgary/Vancouver, and Westjet of course does as well). As far as some of the expected growths in these citys - 50m for TO, 30m for Van, and 15-20m for Calgary...not sure that's going to happen, or is needed.

That is wrong. Look at the combined numbers for both airports. The growth is 16% regardless of the move because it is the combined numbers. These numbers are for Montreal as a whole. Anyone who states that Trudeau experienced a 16% growth rate because of the closure of Mirabel doesn't know what they are talking about.

Yes - I would agree that YUL and YMX together, with an increase of 16% would put them over 10 million. YUL itself though for 2003 was only 7.9 million - factor in a 16% growth, and its about 9.1 million. It's likely fair to assume as well that for 2005 - with the closure of Mirabel - YUL will hit these numbers. For 2003 however, YYC was the third largest by a slim margin.

buddy - You obviously missed the link, and don't want to go back - so here:

http://www.aci-na.org/docs/2003%20Passenger%20Rankings.xls

In fact, you'll also see YMX (Mirabel) down the list...Montreal is 47th and Calgary is 44th...these numbers are for 2003, as 2004 haven't been released.

Here is the link showing JDPowers Global Airport Satisfaction Index - of which Calgary tied for 1st...Toronto didn't even come close for medium sized airports.

http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/pressrelease.asp?ID=2004197

Those numbers are for YUL only. Once YMX's numbers are taken into account, Montreal's combined numbers are much larger than YYC. All of YMX's passenger flights have been moved to YUL. The move was on November 1st. YUL is now set to handle over 10 million passengers per year, definitley making it #3.

Yeah 2003 was kind of a bad year for Eastern Canada with SARS and all...hence the reason why YUL might have slipped behind YYC, but the combined numbers would tell you that although YUL was #4 in 2003, Montreal (YUL and YMX) was #3.

The only one that I know is Toronto and it was good

Whats the latest YYX stats by the way? How fast is it growing?

Those numbers are for YUL only. Once YMX's numbers are taken into account, Montreal's combined numbers are much larger than YYC. All of YMX's passenger flights have been moved to YUL. The move was on November 1st. YUL is now set to handle over 10 million passengers per year, definitley making it #3.

Yeah 2003 was kind of a bad year for Eastern Canada with SARS and all...hence the reason why YUL might have slipped behind YYC, but the combined numbers would tell you that although YUL was #4 in 2003, Montreal (YUL and YMX) was #3.


No disagreement here - however, YUL and YMX are two separate airports! Yes, their numbers combined surpass that...SARS affected ALL of Canada, not just eastern Canada - Toronto would have been affected the worst. Calgary's growth has been huge since Open Skies in '96.

No disagreement here - however, YUL and YMX are two separate airports! Yes, their numbers combined surpass that...SARS affected ALL of Canada, not just eastern Canada - Toronto would have been affected the worst. Calgary's growth has been huge since Open Skies in '96.

yeah, SARS hitted YVR too. the year SARS hit, YVR had two million less passengers than the previous year.

Can somebody post more YVR pics, of the older terminal as well. Not just the fancy new one.

That's modern art btw, and I bet you're not educated enough to appreciate it. You appreciate cheesy displays of canoes and hanging vines at an airport. As Brian in Ont said, it could easily be mistaken for a zoo or something.

Thats stupid you shouldnt need any education to appreciate art, Im sorry but some splattered paint isnt profound. The art at YVR is real, impressive and it took some time and thought. And BTW that paint spill at YYZ probly wasnt painted by a famouse artist.

Can somebody post more YVR pics, of the older terminal as well. Not just the fancy new one.

this terminal was built in the 70s i think and was recently redesigned. it was the international terminal, it's now the domestic terminal:

http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom2.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom4.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom1.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom11.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom10.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom13.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom9.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom6.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom15.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/gallery_images/yvr_domestic/yvrdom12.jpg

more YVR, new terminal:

http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/w-277.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/w-273.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/W-491-%7E1.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fin1.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fin4.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fin3.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fin8.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fin2.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fin7.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fin9.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fin6.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fi11.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fi10.jpg
http://www.cisc-icca.ca/ssef/yvr-fin5.jpg

God I love that terminal in Vancouver! It is so beautiful...and it also kind of makes me wonder how YYZ seems to be the most popular choice here instead of YVR.

Modern/abstract art is the currently most popular art form. Some of the abstract paintings are just as expensive as the old 18th century ones.

Here's an example.
http://www.christeas.com/Abstract-Art-Stones_b.jpg

I don't even know why I'm teaching you this, I guess you've gotta learn it somewhere...

God I love that terminal in Vancouver! It is so beautiful...and it also kind of makes me wonder how YYZ seems to be the most popular choice here instead of YVR.
Well, not everybody shares your intricate taste in architecture...

Modern/abstract art is the currently most popular art form. Some of the abstract paintings are just as expensive as the old 18th century ones.

Here's an example.
http://www.christeas.com/Abstract-Art-Stones_b.jpg

I don't even know why I'm teaching you this, I guess you've gotta learn it somewhere...

i really like the art that the TO airport has....it's just the overall design that lacks orginality in my opinion - too bland.

Well you've gotta take into account that the terminal 1 itself is only about 1/3 completed. Wait until 2008 when the airport is done. Then I'm sure we'll all have different opinions about it.

Well you've gotta take into account that the terminal 1 itself is only about 1/3 completed. Wait until 2008 when the airport is done. Then I'm sure we'll all have different opinions about it.

i don't think the overall interior design is gonna change. it's going to be the same concept....only difference will be the size of the airport. the only thing i think we'll see will be a few more art pieces.

Fair enough, though do tell me; what is that blandness most people are talking about? I fail to notice it... Toronto's new terminal 1 looks exactly like many of the great Asian terminals, it reminds me of Kansai and HK's yet nobody complains they are bland.

http://img85.exs.cx/img85/9394/yvr3kv.jpg
YVR Satellite Photo. The highlighted area has now been upgraded and looks like the rest of the terminal.

If you have a good connection then you can see the full sized photo of sea island (2.2mb) (http://www.spaceimaging.com/gallery/top10_2002/vancouver_full.htm)

Modern/abstract art is the currently most popular art form. Some of the abstract paintings are just as expensive as the old 18th century ones.

Here's an example.
http://www.christeas.com/Abstract-Art-Stones_b.jpg

I don't even know why I'm teaching you this, I guess you've gotta learn it somewhere...

Who said its the most popular? I can paint better then that crap.

Sure you can, it might look easy but it takes skill. Now back to airports...

Toronto's is nice but too generic and looks like too many other airports. Vancouver's is unique and that's why I like it. Toronto went a little over-board with theirs I think, it is nice but too much open space and all that.

Fair enough, though do tell me; what is that blandness most people are talking about? I fail to notice it... Toronto's new terminal 1 looks exactly like many of the great Asian terminals, it reminds me of Kansai and HK's yet nobody complains they are bland.

as others have said as well, it's not original. it looks like a typical airport or one of the best bland airports around. there are so many airports in the world that look so similar to Toronto's. don't get me wrong, it's an awesome airport....but i just think Vancouver is better - it's original.

Yeah filip basicly answered his own question when he said it "looks exactly like many of the great Asian terminals".

For me, the sheer size, number of flights, and overall grandeur of the new Pearson puts it above YVR. It may look 'similar' to other Asian airports, but for me, this does not take away from it, as said enormous airports are also very impressive.

I'm affraid I didn't find YVR is as unique as many have said.

Having said that, Vancouver's airport is quite nice though....my second favourite, third being Ottawa's new terminal.

All the 'pier' type airports (with fingers extending past a big central building) are based on "Skipol' (SP?) in Amsterdam... a 25 year old design, so... neither Van or Toronto are, in fact, that unique.

As for an aiport that sprawls ... see Terminal 3 at Heathrow in London.

the art at Toronto's airport.

http://gtaa.com/Documents/travellers_visitors/art_catalogue.pdf

i really think some of you underestimate the fact the terminal isnt even close to being finished yet either, the main and grandest pier hasnt even been built so i dont think the airport can be judged just yet...with the main pier will come bigger and better art exhibits, architecture, etc.

the art at Toronto's airport.

http://gtaa.com/Documents/travellers_visitors/art_catalogue.pdf

i really think some of you underestimate the fact the terminal isnt even close to being finished yet either, the main and grandest pier hasnt even been built yet so i dont think the aiport can be judged just yet...with the main pier will come bigger and better art exhibits, architecture, etc.

that looks awesome! i love the art the pictures have there....just one thing, too many rainbows if you know what i mean. :bash:

That PDF looks great and the TO airport is defenatly world class, but it doesnt say Toronto or Canada the way YVR does and I think thats important in an airport. When ever im in the terminal I always hear people talking about how great the airport looks.
http://img53.exs.cx/img53/3456/myphotos0089.jpg and it does.

awesome picture.

I've been to 4 of Canada's 5 major airports (Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, and Ottawa), and frankly, there is not much difference between them. If forced to choose, I would probably go with Van, but the rest are not far behind.

re: Calgary vs Montreal air traffic debate: Montreal, 2 international airports or 1, is slightly busier than YYC, but considering Calgary is 1/3 Montreal's size, it's air traffic is impressive.

Why does nobody talks about Montreal's Mirabel airport?
I heard its has become an airport only for "cargo", but it is still an airport, and I think one of the prettiest of Canada.

It's strange that Montreal's airport isn't 2 or 3 times as busy as it is, because Montreal is one of the most beautiful and unique cities in North America. I think it does fairly well with international flights, but without having an airline "hub" there, it just doesn't have the traffic on the domestic side.

Why does nobody talks about Montreal's Mirabel airport?
I heard its has become an airport only for "cargo", but it is still an airport, and I think one of the prettiest of Canada.

I think that the problem with Mirabel is that it's about 40 miles from Downtown Montreal and a highway that was supposed to be built to it was never built. I knew people that worked at Mirabel back in the 90's, and they used to complain that it was only busy on weekends.

I think for a big part, other than the cities' feeder base, the traffic that's fuelling and padding the Vancouver and Calgary's airport numbers are the fact that they are used as feeders by AC, much in the same way that Toronto is used as the hub for central/eastern Canada. Vancouver is the west's gateway, and Calgary is fed by lots of Edmontonians. Montreal's feeder base is primarily its immediate area and for some international flights, Ottawa (which was very close to Mirabel). This is also a reason why Ottawa's numbers are so low.

Are you TOers purely basing your judgement of airports on aesthetics - or do you really spend time in these airports to compare??? An airport first and foremost has to be usable - and in that regard, YYC and YVR are easily better. I spend every week in some of Canada's biggest airports (for the past 3 years - currently between YVR and YYC for the past 6 months) and can tell you that these are better than Pearson. Pearson is large - but that's really all that it has going for it...so what? Doesn't mean I want to spend time there!!!

Calgary Airport's efficiency and proximity to the second largest head office base in Canada , and as a hub in the west - has also seen the cargo flights grow - cargo (measured in Metric Tonnes) increased 115,000 in 2003 alone....to compare, YUL altogether is 135,000, and YVR is about 235,000.

As well, because there are about 2.5 million people living in Calgary and Edmonton (and in between the two), Calgary does serve as the hub for Alberta. There are also a large amount of smaller flights to the oil towns up north, and in between the two major cities.

It's strange that Montreal's airport isn't 2 or 3 times as busy as it is, because Montreal is one of the most beautiful and unique cities in North America. I think it does fairly well with international flights, but without having an airline "hub" there, it just doesn't have the traffic on the domestic side.

Generally flights from Asia goto Vancouver and flights from Europe goto Toronto.

Are you TOers purely basing your judgement of airports on aesthetics - or do you really spend time in these airports to compare??? An airport first and foremost has to be usable - and in that regard, YYC and YVR are easily better. I spend every week in some of Canada's biggest airports (for the past 3 years - currently between YVR and YYC for the past 6 months) and can tell you that these are better than Pearson. Pearson is large - but that's really all that it has going for it...so what? Doesn't mean I want to spend time there!!!

Calgary Airport's efficiency and proximity to the second largest head office base in Canada , and as a hub in the west - has also seen the cargo flights grow - cargo (measured in Metric Tonnes) increased 115,000 in 2003 alone....to compare, YUL altogether is 135,000, and YVR is about 235,000.

As well, because there are about 2.5 million people living in Calgary and Edmonton (and in between the two), Calgary does serve as the hub for Alberta. There are also a large amount of smaller flights to the oil towns up north, and in between the two major cities.

Exactly, too much open unused space. In YVR even above people's heads is used by those awesome hanging walkways that you can see in crazyjoeda's picture. I love the colours and rockwork used in YVR, especially like the pacific passage which you walk through when you get off an international flight. Vancouver's is just comfortable.

Exactly, too much open unused space. In YVR even above people's heads is used by those awesome hanging walkways that you can see in crazyjoeda's picture. I love the colours and rockwork used in YVR, especially like the pacific passage which you walk through when you get off an international flight. Vancouver's is just comfortable.

Comfortable - exactly...and that's what counts!

The Air Canada Lounge is easily the best as well - can't miss it, the big rock facade in Gate C.

Calgary generally has the same "earthy" open feel - lotsa rock, water, stones, open beams, BIG windows, etc.

I agree. Vancouver's airport feels really warm with the artwork and culture. As much as i like Toronto, Pearson Airport feels so concrete. Even in the new Terminal 1, it feels really blank, not warm and cultural like Vancouvers.

Comfortable - exactly...and that's what counts!

The Air Canada Lounge is easily the best as well - can't miss it, the big rock facade in Gate C.

Calgary generally has the same "earthy" open feel - lotsa rock, water, stones, open beams, BIG windows, etc.
I honestly didn't know zoo decor was the new "thing" for airports.

Well whatever you call it, it is.

Toronto Islands airport #1

There were several reasons as to why Mirabel Airport was built;

1) It was believed in the late 60s that Montreal's air traffic and the number of people who travelled through Montreal would explode, and that Dorval Airport would not be able to handle the amount of passengers expected to use it in the years to come. Montreal therefore needed a new airport, one that would be able to handle 50 million passengers per year.

2) Dorval was located in the heart of the city, and as the city grew, so did the number of 60s era jets flying across the city for landing or takeoff. These jets were very loud, and having them consistantly fly over our city is not desirable. So, if Montreal's air traffic was supposed to explode, you might as well just build an airport far away from the city, where not only will there be room to grow, but also where those old, noisy, 60s era jets will not be flying over houses and business, but farmland...disturbing very few peeople.

3) During the 1960s, long-range jets would only be able to fly routes such as London-Montrea, Paris-Montreal, Amsterdam-Montreal, but never would they be able to fly further into cities like Toronto, Chicago, or Los Angeles from Europe because jets that flew so far did not exist yet. Therefore, Montreal was used as a stop-over hub for many of these jets until the early 1970s when the new Boeing 747 was introduced.

Those were the 3 main reasons why Mirabel was built. Now of course, with the political change of the 1970s and the introduction of longer-range jets such as the Boeing 747, Montreal no longer became that important on the aviation scene, and other airports in Toronto, Chicago and Dallas began to grow. Montreal was left out, we did not experience this growth in air traffic other cities have in the past 30 years because of 2 reasons;
-Political instability
-The 2 airports split system, which left Domestic and Transborder traffic at Dorval, and International traffic at Mirabel, making it impossible for passengers to connect flights in Montreal, and also making it impossible for airlines to create a hub in Montreal, right when the hub-and-spoke system was becoming popular.

It's too bad that all of this happened, but right now, Dorval is the best choice. Mirabel airport was never actually completed. It was supposed to have 6 runways and 6 air terminals, but it currently only has 2 runways and 1 air terminal. It was supposed to look similar to another airport built at the time, Dallas-Fort Worth Internation, which is now one of the busiest airports in the world.

Dorval is finally catching up to the bigger airports in Northeastern North America, but it will never be as big as Boston, Toronto, Newark or Philadelphia.

There were several reasons as to why Mirabel Airport was built;

1) It was believed in the late 60s that Montreal's air traffic and the number of people who travelled through Montreal would explode, and that Dorval Airport would not be able to handle the amount of passengers expected to use it in the years to come. Montreal therefore needed a new airport, one that would be able to handle 50 million passengers per year.

2) Dorval was located in the heart of the city, and as the city grew, so did the number of 60s era jets flying across the city for landing or takeoff. These jets were very loud, and having them consistantly fly over our city is not desirable. So, if Montreal's air traffic was supposed to explode, you might as well just build an airport far away from the city, where not only will there be room to grow, but also where those old, noisy, 60s era jets will not be flying over houses and business, but farmland...disturbing very few peeople.

3) During the 1960s, long-range jets would only be able to fly routes such as London-Montrea, Paris-Montreal, Amsterdam-Montreal, but never would they be able to fly further into cities like Toronto, Chicago, or Los Angeles from Europe because jets that flew so far did not exist yet. Therefore, Montreal was used as a stop-over hub for many of these jets until the early 1970s when the new Boeing 747 was introduced.

Those were the 3 main reasons why Mirabel was built. Now of course, with the political change of the 1970s and the introduction of longer-range jets such as the Boeing 747, Montreal no longer became that important on the aviation scene, and other airports in Toronto, Chicago and Dallas began to grow. Montreal was left out, we did not experience this growth in air traffic other cities have in the past 30 years because of 2 reasons;
-Political instability
-The 2 airports split system, which left Domestic and Transborder traffic at Dorval, and International traffic at Mirabel, making it impossible for passengers to connect flights in Montreal, and also making it impossible for airlines to create a hub in Montreal, right when the hub-and-spoke system was becoming popular.

It's too bad that all of this happened, but right now, Dorval is the best choice. Mirabel airport was never actually completed. It was supposed to have 6 runways and 6 air terminals, but it currently only has 2 runways and 1 air terminal. It was supposed to look similar to another airport built at the time, Dallas-Fort Worth Internation, which is now one of the busiest airports in the world.

Dorval is finally catching up to the bigger airports in Northeastern North America, but it will never be as big as Boston, Toronto, Newark or Philadelphia.
Very very interesting...Thanks.

@azzuri.chris: Yeah, that was a very informative answer. It seems like you're saying that Mirabel was doomed from the beginning, because of when it was conceived and built. Hopefully, Dorval/Trudeau will grow in transborder traffic with the US.

Montreal really needs to market itself to Americans more. I love Montreal and wish I didn't live so far away from it now, but it's within easy driving distance of all the big Northeastern US cities.

Great points azzurri.chris on Mirabel.
(I sometimes think they should name Mirabel as Trudeau Airport rather than Dorval, naughty thought)

My vote goes to Toronto; I like Vancouver too, but the architecture just isn't anything as stunning as the new T1.

I have one small problem with Pearson though. The arrival area of T3 is horrible, just a little better than those of third world airports like Dorval :D. Last year I went there to pick up my sister who was coming from Newark; the next day we were off to the Maritimes from the same terminal. She asked me if I was sure we were in the same building when we checked in for our flights in the departure hall of T3! I told her I was quite sure.:D

Thanks for the kind remarks! I find it ironic that Dorval Airport is now named Trudeau Airport! After all...Trudeau was the one responsible for the creation of Mirabel Airport and the planned shut-down of Dorval Airport. Now, the airport that he planned to shut down, is named after him.

Thanks for the kind remarks! I find it ironic that Dorval Airport is now named Trudeau Airport! After all...Trudeau was the one responsible for the creation of Mirabel Airport and the planned shut-down of Dorval Airport. Now, the airport that he planned to shut down, is named after him.

Incredible how One of trudeau's biggest mistakes in Québec turns into his favour!

I completely agree with you, Mirabel should've been called trudeau International! Not Dorval.

I think the the two most impressive airports in Canada have to be both Vancouver's and Toronto's. The Vancouver terminal is quite beautiful, as is Toronto's - even though I have not been in the new terminal yet. However, I voted for St.John's NL, because for many years it was horrible, resembling a bus station. Now, considering the size of the city, thay actually have a beautiful new terminal which is quite pleasant to the eye, one of the few new projects to have happened in that province.

^I agree...for an airport and city its size, YYT has an absolutely beautiful terminal. The same can be said about London, Moncton, Kelowna, and Victoria. All have beautiful new terminals.

VICTORIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT....imo, it's a good small size airport with a good white small airport design.
http://www.cyyj.ca/photos/File0092_640.jpg
http://www.cyyj.ca/photos/File0098_640.jpg
http://www.cyyj.ca/photos/airsideaerial_640.jpg
http://www.cyyj.ca/photos/observationairside_640.jpg
http://www.cyyj.ca/photos/aerialground_640.jpg
http://www.cyyj.ca/photos/File0090_640.jpg
http://www.cyyj.ca/photos/File0142_640.jpg

IMHO, they should plant palm trees in and around YYJ...to give the airport a more tropical feel. It certainly would make it look a lot more beautiful as well!

BTW, considering people have voted for Halifax, Calgary and Montreal, I'm surprised no one has voted for Edmonton! They have a very beautiful new terminal!

Victoria, BC's airport is nice looking. I love small airports that have two or three gates. You can't fly anywhere far, but they are very convenient.

Been only to Montreal and Vancouver airports, and I would vote for Vancouver.

Didn't vote.. but here are some pics of new Terminal 1 in Toronto. Eventually the whole airport is to be replaced.
http://www.gtaa.com/Images/TerminalNewGallery/images/Aerial.jpg
http://www.gtaa.com/Images/TerminalNewGallery/images/NewTerminal10.jpg
http://www.gtaa.com/Images/TerminalNewGallery/images/NewTerminal5.jpg
http://www.gtaa.com/Images/TerminalNewGallery/images/NewTerminal3.jpg

That's modern art btw, and I bet you're not educated enough to appreciate it. You appreciate cheesy displays of canoes and hanging vines at an airport. As Brian in Ont said, it could easily be mistaken for a zoo or something.

:weirdo:
Who are you to talk about being educated and appreciating art? The native art in YVR is famous, valuable, and featured on the new $20 bill. It's internationally renowned!

The professionals don't lie, YVR was rated the best airport in North America.

There were several reasons as to why Mirabel Airport was built;

1) It was believed in the late 60s that Montreal's air traffic and the number of people who travelled through Montreal would explode, and that Dorval Airport would not be able to handle the amount of passengers expected to use it in the years to come. Montreal therefore needed a new airport, one that would be able to handle 50 million passengers per year.

2) Dorval was located in the heart of the city, and as the city grew, so did the number of 60s era jets flying across the city for landing or takeoff. These jets were very loud, and having them consistantly fly over our city is not desirable. So, if Montreal's air traffic was supposed to explode, you might as well just build an airport far away from the city, where not only will there be room to grow, but also where those old, noisy, 60s era jets will not be flying over houses and business, but farmland...disturbing very few peeople.

3) During the 1960s, long-range jets would only be able to fly routes such as London-Montrea, Paris-Montreal, Amsterdam-Montreal, but never would they be able to fly further into cities like Toronto, Chicago, or Los Angeles from Europe because jets that flew so far did not exist yet. Therefore, Montreal was used as a stop-over hub for many of these jets until the early 1970s when the new Boeing 747 was introduced.

Those were the 3 main reasons why Mirabel was built. Now of course, with the political change of the 1970s and the introduction of longer-range jets such as the Boeing 747, Montreal no longer became that important on the aviation scene, and other airports in Toronto, Chicago and Dallas began to grow. Montreal was left out, we did not experience this growth in air traffic other cities have in the past 30 years because of 2 reasons;
-Political instability
-The 2 airports split system, which left Domestic and Transborder traffic at Dorval, and International traffic at Mirabel, making it impossible for passengers to connect flights in Montreal, and also making it impossible for airlines to create a hub in Montreal, right when the hub-and-spoke system was becoming popular.

It's too bad that all of this happened, but right now, Dorval is the best choice. Mirabel airport was never actually completed. It was supposed to have 6 runways and 6 air terminals, but it currently only has 2 runways and 1 air terminal. It was supposed to look similar to another airport built at the time, Dallas-Fort Worth Internation, which is now one of the busiest airports in the world.

Dorval is finally catching up to the bigger airports in Northeastern North America, but it will never be as big as Boston, Toronto, Newark or Philadelphia.



Political inestability is the worst thing that can happen to a city, or even a province.

Was it caused by separist goverments?

Halifax International (YHZ) obviously not the best or busiest airport (annual traffic is roughly the same as Ottawa International) but it still deserves an honorable mention...

The exterior isn't that great. I couldn't actually find any working pics of it but you can easily tell that it was built over a long period of time, since each new section is rather mismatched to the central part of the terminal

The interior, however, is pretty nice, and the airport is in a state of perpetual renovation.
http://destination-ns.com/content/property/03451.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4b/Hiap1.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/08/Hiap3.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/42/Hiap2.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/Hiap4.jpg

Political inestability is the worst thing that can happen to a city, or even a province.

Was it caused by separist goverments?

err... not really, building airports and managing them were the responsibilities of the federal government in the 70's; and the PQ didn't even take power when it was opened in 1975.

Halifax Airport looks really nice. A very "maritime" welcome for the travellers to Nova Scotia.

halifax looks nice.

Yeah. it's overlooked a lot though because not many flights stop over here (although its going to expand its Europe services soon, as well as probably southeast US and carribbean)

err... not really, building airports and managing them were the responsibilities of the federal government in the 70's; and the PQ didn't even take power when it was opened in 1975.

It would be wrong to conclude that seperatism did not have an affect. The truth is, that YES, seperatism had a huge affect on air traffic into Montreal.

It would be wrong to conclude that seperatism did not have an affect. The truth is, that YES, seperatism had a huge affect on air traffic into Montreal.

I was referring to the failure of Mirabel, so I guess we're talking about two related but different things here. :)

Now suppose Montreal was an English speaking city, and Quebec an English speaking province; and there wasn't be a separatist movement here. According to common sense of this forum, English speaking and no separatist movement would mean the economy of Quebec would have grown at the same pace as Toronto's. Mirabel would still be a failure. It's just like closing all international traffic to Pearson and divert all those flights to a new airport built in Barrie (without high-speed rail connecting it).

The whole plan just didn't make much sense. Not one Canadian city could support two major airports, and splitting domestic and international flights between these two airports was just plain stupid. It made it impossible to make connection in Montreal. These decisions were made by the federal government and Transport Canada, you can hardly blame the PQ for that.

As for Montreal's status as an aviation hub. Indeed it's been affected by the economy and the political uncertainties. However, it's doubtful that Montreal's economy would grow to make Mirabel a success with or without Quebec's French speaking population or the nationalist movement. And given the difficulties of connecting between Dorval and Mirabel, I doubt international carriers would stay.

^You do bring up good points, but remember, the low air-traffic levels in Montreal also helped in killing Mirabel. Why? Because Dorval never got the chance to be congested, which gave people no reason to move to Mirabel. Why was there low air traffic levels in Montreal for decades? Because of seperatism.

I like Thunder Bay International (YQT) It's nice for a small town airport.

It's one of the busiest in Ontario. I've heard 3rd busiest, but I don't think it's that busy. Still, it's nice.

^You do bring up good points, but remember, the low air-traffic levels in Montreal also helped in killing Mirabel. Why? Because Dorval never got the chance to be congested, which gave people no reason to move to Mirabel. Why was there low air traffic levels in Montreal for decades? Because of seperatism.

Then again, since a large chunk of traffic was foolishly moved to Mirabel, Dorval never got the chance to be congested. Airlines pulled out because Montreal lost connectivity, so more lost flights from both airports. Plus Montrealers are less likely to travel within Canada than others. These wouldn't be very different even if Montreal's economy was good in all those Mirabel years, and Mirabel would still be a flop. :)

Actually, in conversation with a VP at Air Canada, the VP indicated that the new Toronto terminal 1 is not well designed in terms of functionality at all!

^^^Yah Vid, I was impressed with YQT, for a smaller airport it was really quite stunning.

^I agree about TO's new terminal...though I think it may get better in the long run. TO did plan it for a throughput of around 50 million visitors - though they are far from that right now.

As for now, Calgary and Vancouver are the best to spend time in (and have been ranked as the best for their sizes). Halifax's is actually quite nice as well (only been there twice).

Winnipeg's needs some work - but the last I was there, they are apparently getting a new terminal as well.

I recently (2 days ago) flew YUL-YYZ and YYZ-YUL, YUL is by fatr my fav in Canada. The new expansion is beautiful and stunning. The news shops (Virgin music) and bars and restaurants aree very appealing and welcoming. The airport is very spacious with its new interrior design and the new int'l Jetty looks amazing, simply beautiful.

YYZ:What a disappointment...Im talking about T1
1)The airport is WHITE EVERYWHERE, no color, simply white. I felt i was in a mega hospital. Really bland and boring.

2) The airport is way too big. Too spread out.Taxiing to the gate took forever, not to mention the walk from the gate to the baggage to the car rental.

3) The terminal is not functional. It has a very confusing layout, and baggage took for ever. So many people were complaining about being lost.

YUL's new sections are so much better than T1, wait until you see the International Jetty.

The new Toronto airport has adopted styles from other prominent international airports such as Hong Kong's Chep Lap Kok-- Airport of the year for many years.

I agree that Baggage claim is very slow. But getting lost? That's laughable. The new T1 isn't even that big (yet) compared to other international airports.

The Toronto airport is FAR from completion...
February 8th Update from UrbanToronto
Pier F ("Hammerhead") Under Construction
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/yyzer/Feb08104.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/yyzer/Feb08102.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/yyzer/Feb08103.jpg
http://www.pclaecon.com/Splashpage/Pier-F-East.jpg

There are still many piers to be built.

Toronto's airport is a nightmare...impressive size though.

More photos in this thread (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=151888) and this thread (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=151390).

http://www.worldgallery.cs-future.com/images/DSCN3610.jpg

http://www.worldgallery.cs-future.com/images/DSCN3717.jpg

http://www.worldgallery.cs-future.com/images/DSCN3762.jpg

http://www.worldgallery.cs-future.com/images/DSCN3775.jpg

http://files.photojerk.com/hkskyline/toronto/DSCN3555.jpg

http://files.photojerk.com/hkskyline/toronto/DSCN3563.jpg

http://files.photojerk.com/hkskyline/toronto/DSCN3556.jpg

http://files.photojerk.com/hkskyline/toronto/DSCN3572.jpg

http://files.photojerk.com/hkskyline/toronto/DSCN3570.jpg

http://files.photojerk.com/hkskyline/toronto/DSCN3578.jpg

http://files.photojerk.com/hkskyline/toronto/DSCN3581.jpg

http://files.photojerk.com/hkskyline/toronto/DSCN3595.jpg

About the Pearson Airport, are they gonna do yet another expansion??

Yes. Many many many more.

looks awesome.

I love the new airport. It's a shame we'll have to wait another 10 years till it's completed.

Here are the top 3 busiest airports for aircraft takeoffs & landings:

International airports

Toronto 33,111

Vancouver 23,907

Calgary 17,876

LOCAL AIRPORTS

Boundary Bay 7,870

Abbotsford 7,652

Thunder Bay 7,418

^ Where did you get these numbers? There's already been debate that because Montreal's "other" airport (Mirabel) is closed, Dorval's traffic will increase past Calgary's. I'm assuming you've pulled out the 2003 numbers.

A great site to get this info is:

http://www.aci-na.org/asp/traffic.asp?page=90

BTW - Calgary's airport passed 9 million passengers last year...it has been assumed that YUL has passed 10 million for 2004.

I got it from an article on canada.com that said it used Transport Canada as a source. These were the numbers as of Nov. 2004.

Fair enough - but I've been learning lately to get these numbers right from the source, don't rely on a media middle-man...they've been proven wrong or questionable a few times in the past couple months.

Montreal's YUL is expecting to report over 10 million passengers - not sure yet how that will translate into aircraft movements, because I think Calgary has a very slight advantage in cargo lately, and smaller aircraft.

i am quite looking forward to seeing YUL post-expansion...I was last there in October at it was still a disaster.

conceptually the new T1 at Pearson is great, however until all the major piers open (2005-2007) its simply hell (this is coming from the perspective of someone who uses the airport a lot)

i personally dont think YVR wins any awards for architecture and the West Coast "theme" often descends into kitsch, however, for someone like me, who spends a huge amount of time there, its really quite excellent; great curb to gate, good services at the appropriate places, simply one of the best airports worldwide for ease of use (IMO) -the only other airport that I think compares is Kastrup (close to same size)-though on architectural design Kastrup wins hands down.

i am quite looking forward to seeing YUL post-expansion...I was last there in October at it was still a disaster.

conceptually the new T1 at Pearson is great, however until all the major piers open (2005-2007) its simply hell (this is coming from the perspective of someone who uses the airport a lot)

i personally dont think YVR wins any awards for architecture and the West Coast "theme" often descends into kitsch, however, for someone like me, who spends a huge amount of time there, its really quite excellent; great curb to gate, good services at the appropriate places, simply one of the best airports worldwide for ease of use (IMO) -the only other airport that I think compares is Kastrup (close to same size)-though on architectural design Kastrup wins hands down.

I haven't been to YUL for a while - but I too am in these airports weekly...and I'd say from a aesthetic perspective, Vancouver's is the nicest, and TO's is simply impressive in size.

However, when it comes to spending time in the Canadian airports, Calgary's (especially the Westjet wing) and Vancouver's are by far the best...easy to get around quick, and ease of getting through security and receiving baggage. Calgary's actually won internationally for best small airport (under 10 million passengers), while Van's came in 3rd for medium sized (the same category as TO and presumably YUL now). Calgary should be competing in that same category within a couple years, as it has just passed 9 million a year...it will be interesting to see how it stacks up.

i heard that Kelowna International just got way busier in the past few months. they just expanded a few years ago and they need to expand again because of all this growth.

Pearsons new terminal is the only part of yzz i like. It is probably the best (part of) airport in canada. I dont think that a "cozy" airport is really an airport.

I love the new airport. It's a shame we'll have to wait another 10 years till it's completed.
Won't it be done in 2008?

Also, Montreal's aiport is BRUTAL. I hate getting connecting flights through Montreal to Saint John. HORRIBLE!

I was on a Westjet flight last summer (Calgary - Toronto) & was quite suprised at how quiet YYC was. Of course, there were no line-ups & that was a plus.

YYC's customer service is quite something.

vancouver...all the way...

I was last in YUL a couple years ago and what I saw was shit. However I have heard that since then there has been expansion. The nex portions of YVR, YEG, YYC and for sure YYZ look good. Love the new terminal in Toronto, however hate the time it takes to get to the plane from security. Well for going overseas anyways (domestic is not an issue at all) and I think I landed there the day it opened a friday. That was cool. Regina, Saskatoon and the Peg need work (which I hear is happening). Ottawa I hear as already done have not been there for anumber of years. Halifax was just a pain in the ass to get to the city. Thats it. Other cities I have not used the airports so I can't comment on them.

kelowna is expanding really fast since the city population and tourism keeps on increasing. last time i was there they were adding onto the terminal. it's actually not in a bad location because i think it's like 10km from downtown, so it's not that hard to get to. and victoria international keeps on expanding to. they just opened up a terminal.

oh yeah, the airport in comox bc keeps on expanding to. they're talking about bringing horizon air there and have direct flights to seattle. already they have flights to mexico, calgary, vancouver, and edmonton. it's growing very nicely.

i once made it through security at london airport, even though they found a huge knife in my carry on. luckilly they didnt find the bag of weed in my pocket and my sister's pipe, which she hid in my suitcase without telling me. what a bitch

and then at vancouver airport on the way back, they didnt even take a look at my walkman, even though i told them i had one, they were only interested in laptops. every other time they dusted my cd player for explosives

My favourite Canadian airport is the Lester B. Pearson Airport in Toronto.

I'm afraid when people go through the new Pearson, there will be no doubt about it. It is a gorgeous, almost breathtaking airport, and was recently voted by an international association to be the international Airport of the Year. But... it has to be seen to be believed.
How did this old thread come back from the dead?

wow....this topic started in January 2005....and it's still kicking. o_O



Since then, Vancouver International Airport has completed phase I of its $420 million international terminal expansion:


New expanded international terminal wing completed, adding 5 gates. On the left, at the black area is the site of phase II which will add another 4 gates by 2009. In total, 9 gates will be added with 4 gates capable of handling the new A380's.
http://pacificmetropolis.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/yvr_terminal_expansion_by_larry_goldstei_3.jpg


The new $120 million Link Building under construction will connect the Domestic and International terminals as well as connect both to the new Canada Line. Will be completed by this summer.
http://pacificmetropolis.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/link_building_ii_by_larry_goldstein.jpg
http://pacificmetropolis.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/link_building.jpg



the 60-meter West Coast Themed Creek in the international terminal expansion
http://www.pcl.com/media/files/Projects/22_BC_Region/2200428_5_300.jpg

http://www.pcl.com/media/files/Projects/22_BC_Region/2200428_1_300.jpg

http://www.pcl.com/media/files/Projects/22_BC_Region/2200428_2_300.jpg

30,000 Gallon Jellyfish Aquarium
http://www.pcl.com/media/files/Projects/22_BC_Region/2200428_3_300.jpg

http://www.pcl.com/media/files/Projects/22_BC_Region/2200428_4_300.jpg





Construction of the new Canada Line YVR-Airport Station
http://www.yvr.ca/authority/images/airmail/construction.JPG
http://www.globalairphotos.com/images/bc/richmond/2007/rhh2007_308.jpg
http://www.globalairphotos.com/images/bc/richmond/2007/rhh2007_341.jpg

Since then, Pearson has completed the Hammerhead portion ($800 million) and has significantly increased its capacity.. What I find funny is how everyone here said how Pearson would suffer due to high landing fees.. Yea sure, it's currently growing like never before and adding an impressive array of new airlines (Emirates, Jet Airways...) Currently Pearson's T2 is closed and under demolition - for the future Pier G of T1.

It's landing fees are high, though.

Thunder Bay International Airport enjoys a very large budget surplus and has the lowest landing fees of any airport in the country.

Thunder Bay International - The airport of choice for corrupt organizations trying to hide 747-SPs from the US government. ;)

Airports are like women.. you can't judge their beauty on how cheap they are......

Well in that case, it's the nicest airport in Northern Ontario and the fifth busiest in Ontario.

http://www.tourismandtravel.ca/images/yqtarpt01.jpg
http://www.tourismandtravel.ca/images/yqtarpt02.jpg
http://www.tourismandtravel.ca/images/yqtarpt03.jpg
http://www.tourismthunderbay.com/images/Airport_TBay.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/52/114882521_897a4f823a.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/caribb/114882521/)

So there! :P

For references:

Sudbury Municipal Airport (http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1098/572552182_aba42debf0.jpg) | Sault Ste Marie Federal Airport (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/152/384021161_b18a3c721f.jpg)

Not the biggest, best, or newest but I like my Saskatoon airport. Vancouver will be great if and when they ever finish working on the terminal.

Small Airport. We handle 1/4 the amount of planes that Toronto Pearson handles.

but never the less its a great looking airport

http://www.confederationc.on.ca/ace/photogallery/ace-externals-100803-site/images/PA081974.jpg

http://www.confederationc.on.ca/ace/photogallery/ace-externals-100803-site/images/PA081931.jpg

http://www.confederationc.on.ca/ace/photogallery/ace-externals-100803-site/images/PA081940.jpg

In front of the Confederation College's Aviation Center of Excellence building
http://us.airliners.net/photos/photos/1/2/9/1183921.jpg

In front of the bowater mill.
http://us.airliners.net/photos/photos/9/8/0/1207089.jpg

I know only 2 canadian airport: Toronto Pearson and Montreal Trudeau.
I think that Trudeau is too small for a city like Montreal and Paerson was mostly under construction. So my votes goes to Toronto.

Not the biggest, best, or newest but I like my Saskatoon airport. Vancouver will be great if and when they ever finish working on the terminal.

YVR is planning to spend $2 billion on a fourth offshore runway by filling the ocean and billions more on masive domestic and international terminal expansions. Construction will begin in 2015 and will end in 2027, and would increase airport capacity to 25 million passengers annually and half a million flights.


The configuration on the top right is the chosen configuration.
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/4085/yvr23me.jpg
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/8193/yvrmap5we.jpg



http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/1314/yvrfuture8gl.jpg

I've been though alot of Canadian airports lately... just in the past few months:

Vancouver - not so impressed; it's a bit messy at the moment though so I can't really judge. Domestic was uninspiring, but I haven't seen the international part yet shown in the photos below.

Calgary - very nice; small but well designed. Nice view of the city.

Edmonton - pretty much the same as Calgary, but they've retained part of the older building that gives it a retro charm. I love the massive gas fireplace they have... I think it's in a restaurant or lounge. Very cool.

Regina - small and charmless... the security have no idea what they're doing. I had by far the worst security line up there at 6 am, not what I'd expect considering where I was.

Winnipeg - shitty. It's got the retro, but no charm.

Hamilton - small and charmless.

Montreal (Trudeau) - has to be the worst airport in Canada. Honestly, I've never seen such a mess. I wish I had a chance to see Mirabel before it closed... I hope it was better than the dung-heap they have to deal with now.

Toronto (City Centre) - tiny tiny tiny, but Porter does it right. It's particularly neat to enter the ferry terminal, take the ferry across, and then walk right into the airport. Hopefully Porter can stay in business.

Toronto (Pearson) - absolutely no other airport like it in Canada... no comparison. Most other Canadian terminals would fit inside T1's departures area... but it's not just big, the details are done right too. T3 can even take other airports to task, and it's clearly the old dog of Pearson now. The train between them is fun, but surprisingly shaky for something so new.

Having said all of that, I much prefer flying out of smaller airports than larger ones. It's not that it's any easier really, it's just a more intimate experience. I like smaller planes (sometimes), particularly turbo-props, and it's fun to walk onto the tarmac and up the stairs every once and awhile. I try to fly out of Hamilton as much as possible, though I find it's actually cheaper to fly our of Pearson most often (due to increased flight availability).

Thunder Bay's airport looks nice.

I agree.. the airport in Montreal is abominable.. dingy and depressing beyond belief. I avoid it at all cost.
The last time I saw the Vancouver airport was a couple of years ago, and I can't remember a single thing about it. It was sort of like the Winnipeg airport but much bigger.
Danny D, I find it extremely hard to believe that the TB airport does 1/4 of the traffic of Pearson.. are you sure about that? I know the figures contain all the tiny aircraft like Otters, etc.. but even still..

The Domestic part of YVR is basically the old airport. The International part is a different experience. Much nicer.

I agree.. the airport in Montreal is abominable.. dingy and depressing beyond belief. I avoid it at all cost.
The last time I saw the Vancouver airport was a couple of years ago, and I can't remember a single thing about it. It was sort of like the Winnipeg airport but much bigger.
Danny D, I find it extremely hard to believe that the TB airport does 1/4 of the traffic of Pearson.. are you sure about that? I know the figures contain all the tiny aircraft like Otters, etc.. but even still..

From Transportation Canada 2006

Toronto/Lester B. Pearson International (YYZ)
Number of Passengers 30,972,577
Aircraft Movements 417,183

Thunder Bay International (YQT)
Number of Passengers 611,000
Aircraft Movements 100,145

As you can see, aircraft movement is 1/4. We even beat Hamilton in Aircraft movements. passenger movement is much smaller as we cant land anything larger than 737's :D (actually i think our runway is just long enough to service them '6,200' can anyone confirm the amount of space a 737 needs to land?)

And another picture!

http://www.freewebs.com/clannoscope/YQT.JPG

^^That is what I suspected; a lot of that would be little bush planes buzzing in and out.

I am a bit in shock that 8 people find Dorval to be their favourite airport in Canada...

Pearson really has no competition in Canada. It's in a class of its own (now a large airport having passed the arbitrary 30 mil mark).. It's huge, gigantic even - and is the most expensive project in Canadian history.

Pearson really has no competition in Canada. It's in a class of its own (now a large airport having passed the arbitrary 30 mil mark).. It's huge, gigantic even - and is the most expensive project in Canadian history.

Is Pearson finished with all its renovations or not?

From Transportation Canada 2006

Toronto/Lester B. Pearson International (YYZ)
Number of Passengers 30,972,577
Aircraft Movements 417,183

Thunder Bay International (YQT)
Number of Passengers 611,000
Aircraft Movements 100,145

As you can see, aircraft movement is 1/4. We even beat Hamilton in Aircraft movements. passenger movement is much smaller as we cant land anything larger than 737's :D (actually i think our runway is just long enough to service them '6,200' can anyone confirm the amount of space a 737 needs to land?)

Yeah, but the Waterloo Regional International Airport beat Thunder Bay by 3:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Region_of_Waterloo_International_Airport

:lol:

Is Pearson finished with all its renovations or not?

Not yet as it's a long-term plan.

I've only gone to vancouver, so go vancouver!

if there's one thing i don't like about YVR, it's space. the concourse/check-in area is too narrow and often lineups block people from walking. that area should be at least two times wider. also, i don't know what they were thinking when they built the arrival's area.....it's way too small and it's already getting crowded, should be at least 4x larger.

i think the design and theme of the airport is quite nice......they couldn't build any massive and heavy structures like Pearson. YVR sits on a river delta, any heavy buildings would require a lot of soil packing - very expensive - otherwise it would sink. It's one of the reasons why the Olympic oval in Richmond is costing so much to build.

the domestic part was a major renovation of the old terminal (which was both the international and domestic areas back in the day) built some decades ago....the renovation was done a few years ago, a major attempt to make it blend with the new parts of the airport.

there's a lot of construction going on at YVR right now with the Canada Line arriving, international terminal expansion, and the Link building....it'll be a lot better when it's completed. Phase I of the international terminal expansion was done in March, and phase II should be completed next year. The new Link Building should be done this summer, and the Canada Line late 2009.

Pearson has Pier G to build in maybe 2 years, Pier H, which will look cool since it'll curve a bit, will come right afterward. This will give Pearson 8 piers (A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H) and the space available at the infield terminal. I believe that should be enough for another good 10 years of growth.

Pearson Airport is such amazing airport and the GTAA is doing a wonderful job considering what they have been through. Before the GTAA took over the Pearson was a mess, it was old, uggly, and in-efficient. Since the GTAA took over Pearson airport has been doing 100% better without the Federal Governments help. The feds actually reduced the rent for every major airport in Canada except for Pearson Airport! Pearson is currently paying over 150 million. which is forcing the GTAA to raise landing fees for air carriers. Many airlines though are still applying to start flights at Pearson because 1) theres a big market it the GTA and 2) The security procedures at Pearson are less difficult than those in the states. I have no doubt in my mind that Pearson will achieve its 50 million passengers by 2020. and I can't wait for the Pearson to be 100% complete because it will certainly be able to stack against the best aiports in the world!

Yeah, but the Waterloo Regional International Airport beat Thunder Bay by 3:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Region_of_Waterloo_International_Airport

:lol:

Thunder Bay has more international flights though, and unlike Waterloo, is part of the National Airports System.

And most of those planes aren't "Bush planes" (lots are) they're actually small passenger planes operated by first nations. Many of those communities are accessible by air only, which is why Thunder Bay and Sioux Lookout airports are so busy.

And most of those planes aren't "Bush planes" (lots are) they're actually small passenger planes operated by first nations. Many of those communities are accessible by air only, which is why Thunder Bay and Sioux Lookout airports are so busy.

That makes sense.

Exactly. :)

Thunder Bay and Halifax both have airports that are much busier than their population would suggest. They owe their success to strategic location. As was mentioned earlier, Thunder Bay is a regional hub that serves many isolated communities in Northern Ontario. Bearskin Airlines is typical of alot of traffic through Thunder Bay. If you want to travel to Vancouver, Toronto, etc. or beyond, you have to go through Thunder Bay.

Halifax is similar in that it is a hub for Atlantic Canada, but it's also the closest city (on the mainland) to Europe.

Montreal's airport is an ugly mess. Toronto's airport is big, efficient, but nothing special. Signage is atrocious and fails miserably in welcoming visitors to Toronto and Canada. I've heard great things about the airport in Vancouver, but my vote goes to Halifax. Halifax is tiny and alot of it is very old, but it does everything very well.

Yeah, but the Waterloo Regional International Airport beat Thunder Bay by 3:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Region_of_Waterloo_International_Airport

:lol:
Referencing Wiki should be banned.

According to Transport Canada, by aircraft movements TBay is ranked 15th at 100154 and K/W is ranked 16th at 100149.
Pages 25 & 27 (http://www.tc.gc.ca/pol/en/report/TP577/pdf/TP577_06.pdf).

dp

It's pretty accurate in most cases, it's the lack of fact checking on smaller articles. :) It's supposed to be a site that combines all sources on the internet into one location for easy reference, not an absolute primary source. That is what the external links and references are for. ;) If I was doing a report, I would use Wikipedia, but I would cite the work Wikipedia cites. So it isn't entirely invalid, it is just victim to incompetence by it's users.

edit:
I'm updating Wikipedia now; it was correct, sort of -- they were using the preliminary report, and failed to update it when the official report came out, so all of the aircraft movement numbers are off by about 200 or so. ;) So it was technically right -- just outdated.

So it isn't entirely invalid, it is just victim to incompetence by it's users.
Or laziness. For the most part, I find Wiki is a simple rehash of info from elsewhere and as such, is most often dated or wrong. Considering I can type a search request into Google as fast as I can into Wiki, why wouldn't I go to the most accurate source of the information??

Thunder Bay has more international flights though, and unlike Waterloo, is part of the National Airports System.

And most of those planes aren't "Bush planes" (lots are) they're actually small passenger planes operated by first nations. Many of those communities are accessible by air only, which is why Thunder Bay and Sioux Lookout airports are so busy.

That's interesting. For an airport to be included in the "National Airports System", it has to meet this criteria:

"Any airport sustaining an annual traffic of 200,000 passengers or more for a period of three years will be added to the NAS. Any non-capital airport falling below this threshold for a period of three years will be removed from the NAS."

I'm not sure what real advantage there is for an airport to be in the system, but Waterloo is too new to be included... local companies fly in their executive jets, there's a flight training centre, it has winter charters to places like Cancun and Cuba, NW Airlines has daily flights to Detroit, and now WestJet flies out of Waterloo to Calgary. It takes time for people in the region to break their habit of automatically using Pearson.

People from Waterloo Region have to reduce their reliance on Pearson, and demand more flights out of Waterloo ,and fill those planes up.... when that happens, I see no reason why Waterloo can't match a place like Abbotsford for passenger traffic.... look at the population base around Waterloo.

I recently was in the New T-1 in Toronto and all i can say is wow, wow, WOW!..its huge and beatiful!! Honestly, When i looked at Vancouvers, i threw up alittle in my mouth..it looks like a fkn day care centre..wtf's with that...Toronto is truely on a class of its own, comparable with the great international airports like Chep Lap Kok, KLIA, etc..Its very efficient now that the majority of the redevelopment plan is complete..And i just got back from a trip to Italy but i flew through therminal 3..still nice tho!

If you guys are complaining about Pearson and other Canadian Airports..try going through Italian ones:|:| omggg its ridiculous..soo in-efficient and slow! My cuzzins got their luggages lost and they didnt come back for 5 days!! This was all at Romes airport, Italy's biggest. Its supposedly 'new' but it was dark, dirty, smelly, and no windows:| I was very unimpressed..

Go Toronto!!

AleE..

Thunder Bay is the only international airport between Toronto and Winnipeg. That might be why it's included in the national system, same for the Territories. Though they include London International, and it gets even less traffic than Thunder Bay?

http://www.tc.gc.ca/programs/airports/policy/nap/NationalList.htm

Actually, now that I read your post, you say "200,000" passengers - Thunder Bay gets 600,000+ passengers.

Thunder Bay is the only international airport between Toronto and Winnipeg. That might be why it's included in the national system, same for the Territories. Though they include London International, and it gets even less traffic than Thunder Bay?

http://www.tc.gc.ca/programs/airports/policy/nap/NationalList.htm

Actually, now that I read your post, you say "200,000" passengers - Thunder Bay gets 600,000+ passengers.


Yes, I see that, I wonder how many passengers went through Waterloo last year.... I can't find any stats on that.


When I get to Toronto in a couple of months, I'll have to take the time to check the new terminal out....

I have trouble finding passenger stats too, but I Waterloo was around 500,000 in 2005.

Referencing Wiki should be banned.

According to Transport Canada, by aircraft movements TBay is ranked 15th at 100154 and K/W is ranked 16th at 100149.
Pages 25 & 27 (http://www.tc.gc.ca/pol/en/report/TP577/pdf/TP577_06.pdf).

Thanks for that report.... but the Wiki reference is also correct because the figures they give are from Transport Canada for preliminary stats. You can't blame Wiki (which stated that the figures where preliminary) that Transport Canada adjusted its figures. I didn't notice that they were referencing "preliminary" stats.

edit...

I too have difficulty understanding when people say Pearson is "nothing special". I think I have done as much travelling as the next person, and I can assure you it is very special. I took a lot of pix there a couple of weeks ago and accidently erased them before I got home from my trip. But it has been well documented with photos already by others....

That PDF looks great and the TO airport is defenatly world class, but it doesnt say Toronto or Canada the way YVR does and I think thats important in an airport. When ever im in the terminal I always hear people talking about how great the airport looks.
http://img53.exs.cx/img53/3456/myphotos0089.jpg and it does.
I'm not trying to sound mean or rude or anything but this section honestly looks bad. Alot of ignorant people (especially from the US) already look at Canada as all trees, snow, wood and other weird things. Even though we all know it's absolutly nothing like this, alot of so called "smart people" from other places think it is. This just adds to the enourmously stupid sterotype. Not a good start when your entering Canada. Where as Person is kind of a smack in the face to those who think otherwise.

I too have difficulty understanding when people say Pearson is "nothing special". I think I have done as much travelling as the next person, and I can assure you it is very special. I took a lot of pix there a couple of weeks ago and accidently erased them before I got home from my trip. But it has been well documented with photos already by others....

I've been to many airport terminals around the world also. I really don't see how Pearson stands out at all. It's clean, massive, efficient, new, and accomplishes the task at hand. By these criteria, Pearson is great. If I want to be wowed by design, beauty, charm, art, luxury, local culture, architecture, Pearson is not a candidate to accomplish any of these things.

Madrid's airport? Yes.
KL? Yes.
Incheon? Yes.
Rekjavik? Yes.
Pearson? Um, sorry, but no.

Pearson isn't bad at all, it's just not special. As much as I love airports, most major airports around the world aren't that special. Special requires alot of money.....money that wasn't there.

^ the whole point was to make it look original, and which it is, rather than another "white wall" airport. There are many airports in the world that are "white" themed and it isn't really distinct. The other thing, BC is pretty much all trees and wood....you can't miss it - it's not a stereotype, and i think it identifies the west coast environment very well.

i think it's one of the most original airport designs around the continent. you could say the same for the airport in Athens too.....like YVR, it's also like a museum.

I've been to many airport terminals around the world also. Large convention halls and other buildings of massive scale. I really don't see how Pearson stands out at all. It's clean, massive, efficient, new, and accomplishes the task at hand. If I want to be wowed by design, Pearson is not a candidate to accomplish that.

Madrid's airport? Yes. KL? Yes. Incheon? Yes. Pearson? Um, sorry, but no.

i agree....the only thing i like about Pearson is the size. not to be disrespectful, but it's simply a "white" design that has been used by countless numbers of airports. i don't see any originality, except maybe the art here and there. don't get me wrong though, it definitely is a nice airport.

here's a refresh on those stats for 2007 Q1:

Toronto 7,438,701 http://www.gtaa.com/local/files/en/Corporate/Financials/QuarterlyPassengers.pdf
Vancouver 3 922 458 http://www.yvr.ca/pdf/authority/statistics/Apr%202007%20Traffic%20Update%20Cover%20REVISED.pdf
Montreal 3 012 074 http://www.admtl.com/uploadedFiles/a_propos/salle_de_presse/PaxAvr07-Fra.pdf
Calgaray 2,871,575 http://www.calgaryairport.com/fts/getfile.cfm?FID=9054

I haven't seen the new Toronto terminal, but I viewed the international part of the Vancouver airport last year and I was quite impressed.

winnipegs is my favorit in canada and my favorit in the world is casablancas........

Part of the newly completed phase I international terminal expansion:


60-metre themed creek
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1325/598496389_1e480e81b9.jpg?v=0

30,000 gallon jellyfish tank operated by the Vancouver Aquarium
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1314/598831932_fe2ac73a0c.jpg?v=0

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1211/598523773_45fd8a4ae3.jpg?v=0

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1010/598844966_9889fe4942.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/216/487804016_3265804044.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/95/231416315_0e7a6c7625.jpg?v=0


Lights resemble "floating logs"
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/207/487804136_7f6dbbfcd9.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/174/487831933_99b9e98a3e.jpg?v=0



The core of the newly expanded international terminal....behind this pic is a Tim Hortons, a Milestones, and shops.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/206/487804264_29e74ba0e5.jpg?v=0

Part of the new international terminal expansion:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1325/598496389_1e480e81b9.jpg?v=0

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1314/598831932_fe2ac73a0c.jpg?v=0

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1211/598523773_45fd8a4ae3.jpg?v=0


Damn thats a nice looking airport grats Vancouver.

Here's a few of Halifax since there haven't been a whole lot of pics of it yet. Not too fancy, nothing impressive, but not terribly ugly either. Based on just photos, my vote goes to Vancouver, although I was extremely impressed with Pearson when I visited the new terminal last summer.

Anywho, here's YHZ, the building that introduced Nova Scotia to the wonder that is the escalator...

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/32/51595618_3945407e37_o.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1051/553149479_a52f1ee1ca_o.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/199/517161438_53621d586f_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/145/402039109_d4e07e3a66.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/194/488296427_9055ac586d.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1189/538926539_ead10dd0a1.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/129/328898105_80073bceff.jpg

I've been to many airport terminals around the world also. I really don't see how Pearson stands out at all. It's clean, massive, efficient, new, and accomplishes the task at hand. By these criteria, Pearson is great. If I want to be wowed by design, beauty, charm, art, luxury, local culture, architecture, Pearson is not a candidate to accomplish any of these things.

Madrid's airport? Yes.
KL? Yes.
Incheon? Yes.
Rekjavik? Yes.
Pearson? Um, sorry, but no.

Pearson isn't bad at all, it's just not special. As much as I love airports, most major airports around the world aren't that special. Special requires alot of money.....money that wasn't there.

With all due respect to your opinion, alot of people would argue that Pearson's strongest point is it's modern design, which is most evident in it's details. How structural elements gracefully define the spaces. What materials are used for the flooring, or in the bathroom (best bathrooms that I've seen in Canada, I'll add). I will assure you they did not cheap out. It's been done in the same fine modern architectural tradition that defines Toronto; it also continues a 'legacy' started with Toronto's well-loved old Terminal 1.

I have to say, after seeing the Vancouver photos... that is certainly impressive. You can tell that Vancouver is gearing up for the international spotlight. I'd say we have Canada's two best airports right there.

In the second last photo, the Nova Scotia guy looks like one of those blow up sex dolls! hehe!

Why is his head shaped like that????

Why is his head shaped like that????

To set your beer down on, of course! :cheers:

Ahhhhhh. And it's in Nova Scotia.. Yes, that makes sense.

Technically you should set your Alexander Keith's on his head... he would appreciate that the most!

Those who love it, love it a lot.

Those who love it, love it a lot.


True, true. Also the beer ain't a bad idea, too!

In the second last photo, the Nova Scotia guy looks like one of those blow up sex dolls! hehe!
:lol:

Here's some neat older photos

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h140/halpic/i_photographs7.jpg

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h140/halpic/i_photographs5.jpg

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h140/halpic/i_photographs4.jpg

I've never been to Vancouver's airport, but what I've seen here deserves accolades. Regardless of ones personal tastes, Vancouver really made a worthy effort to create something special.

Airports are often the first introduction to a country. With the once in a lifetime opportunity to promote Vancouver and BC in 2010, it was crucial that Vancouver got this right. Good job.

Thanks for the Halifax Airport pics. I heard about the First Place Award when I landed there last year. I admit to taking that airport for granted till informed of the prize. After some reflection, I fully acknowledge that it was deserving.

Algonquin: your points are noted. I suppose I simply prefer modern design to be alot more flamboyant, innovative, extreme, sexy. What do you think of Incheon or Madrid? Those two are quite widely admired. There are pics of them in the airport forum.

Penhorn, I loved those old airport pix! Here is one from Toronto, in the 70's

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/postcardseries.jpg

Cool photo TB, I have no memory of the old T1 but I've seen aerial photos and it looked quite modern for the time.

http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/8431/2095925260043708820bfiorz1.jpg
http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/94/airportaa7.jpg
http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/7213/lakehead010mc2.gif

The last one has nothing to do with the airport, I just find it charming. :) They city should really consider rebuilding them, they'd be a wonderful addition to the suburban banality of intercity. (There were a few other city gates, Fort Williams had a castle theme and Port Arthur's other gate was brown and said "The Garden City: Average Summer Temp 67°".)

Lovin' those old pix!

Algonquin: your points are noted. I suppose I simply prefer modern design to be alot more flamboyant, innovative, extreme, sexy. What do you think of Incheon or Madrid? Those two are quite widely admired. There are pics of them in the airport forum.

Pearson is reserved, I'll admit that. I'll go have a look at those other airports.

Let's keep these old photos coming... they're awesome.

Does anyone have photos of the airports in Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Kelowna, Victoria, Ottawa, or even Dorval.

A recent aerial shot of Pearson from FlickR

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1373/621558756_ff5fb0db1d_b.jpg

You see T2 being demolished at the bottom, T1 is the monster above it and T3 is the cute thing beside it! HUGE airport - simply incredibly huge.

Mirabel was awesome, I remember you could see people leaving those funky elevated buses and entering the terminal from a huge balcony... we would try and find the parent or friend and wave hello where's-waldo-style!

Then we could see them get their luggage and then we headed downstairs to welcome them.

While I was waiting there was plenty of arcade games and space to run around after my brother... good times.

In retrospect it is sad that they did not use the Mirabel money to upgrade Dorval... would have had lasting benefits. Have they found a use for Mirabel?

In retrospect it is sad that they did not use the Mirabel money to upgrade Dorval... would have had lasting benefits. Have they found a use for Mirabel?

I think it's a cargo airport for the time being - and Bombardier uses the space too.

Here's Mirabel:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/116/252104099_1aab7879cc_o.jpg

It's a nice airport, shame it didn't work out.

who would like Kelowna's airport the best? It's pretty tiny at the moment... Nice though I guess...

Ummm, I really like the Edmonton airport. I like the old and new parts of it.

can't wait to see Winnipeg's $600 million airport redevelopment complete in 2009:
http://www.waa.ca/redevelopment_images/i/transborder_waiting.jpg

http://www.waa.ca/redevelopment_images/i/aerial_view.jpg


Parking lot
http://www.waa.ca/redevelopment_images/i/parkade_a.jpg



http://www.waa.ca/redevelopment_images/i/baggage_claim.jpg

http://www.waa.ca/redevelopment_images/i/level2_departure.jpg

http://www.waa.ca/redevelopment_images/i/evening_loadingzone.jpg

http://www.waa.ca/UserFiles/Image/model1.jpg

http://www.waa.ca/UserFiles/Image/model4.jpg

who would like Kelowna's airport the best? It's pretty tiny at the moment... Nice though I guess...

Ummm, I really like the Edmonton airport. I like the old and new parts of it.

http://www.movekelownaforward.com/common/photos/YLWFuture.jpg
From the Kelowna Daily Courier:

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

$150 million needed for Kelowna airport plans
By J.P. SQUIRE
Wednesday, July 12, 2006, 12:01 AM

Passenger volumes at Kelowna International Airport are expected to double and perhaps even triple to three million a year in the next 20 years.

But getting to that level will require an investment of $150 million to nearly double the size of the terminal, build a four-level parkade with 2,400 stalls, two runway extensions to 10,000 feet and a new taxiway the entire length of the runway.

A master plan approved by city council Monday also calls for a future overpass over the CN Rail tracks and a so-called diamond or full interchange at Highway 97.

The future could also see the integration of the rail line with airport operations. Other cities are building rail connections to their airports for light rail transit systems, noted Mayor Sharon Shepherd, while Kelowna already has a rail line between the highway and terminal.

The master plan called for the current 7,300-foot runway to be extended to 9,000 feet by 2008 and to 10,000 feet by 2025. A single runway would be enough to accommodate the 133,000 aircraft movements expected in 2025.

A runway extension to the south would require the acquisition of an addition 15 hectares of land: seven in the regional district and eight in the city. The runway extension will allow fully loaded aircraft with wingspans up to 65 metres, including the Airbus 330 and Boeing 787.

The Airbus has a range of 4,850 nautical miles and the Boeing 787 a range of 7,000 nautical miles to reach destinations such as Europe and Australia.

The peak number of passengers in the terminal building will increase from the current 380-480 passengers in one hour to 680 by 2015 and to 900 by 2025, according to the report. So the terminal will nearly double to 19,000 square metres by expanding to the southwest, where the long-term parking lot is now located.

The impact of the airport was 1,835 jobs and $310 million in economic output in 2005, which is expected to increase to 3,104 jobs and more than $525 million in economic activity by 2015.

At Monday’s meeting, councillors approved the latest expansion that will provide a parking space for another large aircraft.

A $2.4-million contract to Ansell Construction will also add 381 new parking stalls to the long-term parking lot and pave the 300 gravel stalls built in 2005. That will result in a total of 2,202 public parking stalls at the airport.

Roger Sellick told council he used to think he was the general manager of an airport, but with all the changes in recent years, he joked he now thinks of himself as “the manager of a construction site where airplanes land.”

© Wednesday, July 12, 2006 Copyright KelownaDailyCourier.ca