daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Airports and Aviation > Airports

Airports discussions about existing airports



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 3rd, 2007, 12:51 AM   #681
Canadian74
Registered User
 
Canadian74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 533
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregPz View Post
To give you an idea of how the rankings will change for 2007 here's the biggest movers and losers.

For the 12 months up to July 2007 the following airports have had a growth rate of over 10%:
New Delhi, Mumbai, Dubai, Chengdu, Beijing, Moscow (DME), Kunming, Manila, Seoul (ICN), Shanghai (SHA), Madrid, Charlotte, New York (JFK), Dublin, Johannesburg, Istanbul and Shenzhen.

The following have shown a decline in pax traffic:
Bangkok, Osaka (KIX), Nagoya, Cleveland, Chicago (ORD), Sao Paulo (CGH), St Louis, Dallas/Fort Worth, London (LHR), Minneapolis, Manchester, New York (LGA), Fukuoka, Osaka (ITM) and Cincinnati.
Where did you that information from? Can you provide a link, please?
Canadian74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 3rd, 2007, 03:58 AM   #682
Bitxofo
¡Viva el metro!
 
Bitxofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Alderaan BCN BKK ATH PAR LON SYD SFO CPT TYO SCL CHC BUE SCG SVQ AGP BDN
Posts: 37,525
Likes (Received): 3674

Quote:
Originally Posted by xlchrisij View Post
Wooow, Amsterdam is doing great!!

More than Hong Kong and New York?? That's great!

46,065,719!

I would realy love to see the airport grow, hope it's going to have new terminals!!
Madrid Barajas is overtaking Amsterdam Schiphol since the beginning of this year...
__________________
www.urbanrail.net
Εγώ είμαι ο Νταβόρ!!
David (DavoR for my friends)
川添 Kawazoe (riverside) 海斗 Kaito (big dipper of the ocean), in Japanese.
Yo si la ciudad no tiene metro, como que no es gran ciudad y entonces ya paso de vivir allí. Norreport+12000
Bitxofo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2007, 10:51 AM   #683
isaidso
the new republic
 
isaidso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The United Provinces of America
Posts: 29,756
Likes (Received): 10983

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian74 View Post
Because of Montreal being a French-speaking city, which results in low domestic and trans-border passengers. But people from Montreal travel more internationally compared to other Canadian cities (mainly to France). It is also close to YOW and YYZ, so the traffic is kind of divided between these three cities.

Compare YUL's 11.4 million to YYC's 11+ million. Calgary is 1/3 of Montreal, but still has roughly the same amount of passengers.

So far this year YUL has seen huge increases in passenger numbers... Comparable to YYC... I think overall growth is around 6-8% for YUL, which I think will result in YUL being Canada's third busiest for another year.

And as you mentioned, isolation of Australian cities is also a major factor... MEL and YUL have different markets.
So, you're saying francophones fly less because they are surrounded by anglophones? Interesting argument, but it doesn't make sense to me. Language has never prevented me from travelling to another place. Besides, most Montrealers speak English very well. They aren't going to stay in Quebec because they want to speak French when they land at their destination. They aren't any less inclined to travel beyond their provincial/state borders than Torontonians or Melbournians. Now if this was North Carolina or some place like that, perhaps, but these are people living in a cosmopolitan city. They hosted the Olympics...hardly an inward looking people.

Your second argument that Montrealers travel internationally more than other Canadians would suggest greater volume at Dorval, not less. If no direct flight exists from Montreal, wouldn't they still have to fly to leave Montreal for the connector?

Thanks for the arguments, but they really don't add up in my mind. A grotesquely mismanaged air travel industry in Montreal would make more sense. Expensive flights, massive competition from rail, or some other monumental barrier to air travel is the only explanation for a 50% drop from a normal passenger volume.

I do think that Dorval numbers will start to climb significantly over the next 20 years. A top 50 rank seems more appropriate for a city like this.

Last edited by isaidso; November 3rd, 2007 at 11:00 AM.
isaidso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2007, 11:27 AM   #684
GregPz
Explore
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Durban
Posts: 2,742
Likes (Received): 249

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian74 View Post
Where did you that information from? Can you provide a link, please?
It's from the ACI Monthly Traffic Reports. You have to order them or be a member but you can view the top 30 at www.aci.aero
__________________
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.
GregPz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 3rd, 2007, 09:41 PM   #685
Canadian74
Registered User
 
Canadian74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 533
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post

Your second argument that Montrealers travel internationally more than other Canadians would suggest greater volume at Dorval, not less. If no direct flight exists from Montreal, wouldn't they still have to fly to leave Montreal for the connector?
What I meant to say was Montrealers travel more internationally than domestically compared to YYC (both have same No. of pax).

Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
I do think that Dorval numbers will start to climb significantly over the next 20 years. A top 50 rank seems more appropriate for a city like this.
YUL is already experiencing above average growth this year (around 6-8%).
Canadian74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 4th, 2007, 09:58 AM   #686
isaidso
the new republic
 
isaidso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The United Provinces of America
Posts: 29,756
Likes (Received): 10983

OK, that makes more sense. It's good to hear that the growth is in the 6-8% range. Do you have a link to half year figures for 2007? I tried, but the only site I found required special access privileges.
isaidso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2007, 11:53 PM   #687
Black Cat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,774
Likes (Received): 815

[/QUOTE]Thanks for the arguments, but they really don't add up in my mind. A grotesquely mismanaged air travel industry in Montreal would make more sense. Expensive flights, massive competition from rail, or some other monumental barrier to air travel is the only explanation for a 50% drop from a normal passenger volume.

I do think that Dorval numbers will start to climb significantly over the next 20 years. A top 50 rank seems more appropriate for a city like this.[/QUOTE]

Montreal does not have a mismanaged air travel industry, at least since the closure of Mirabel, there is no significant competition from rail or bus transport, and prices to fly are very reasonable from Dorval. Montreal also has the advantage of having a lot of passengers from Ottawa who travel to Dorval to use its extensive flight connections across the Atlantic and elsewhere. Air traffic though has risen from its low of 7-8m passengers in the 1990s, to 11+m now, and this should continue to grow whilst the city's economy is performing well now.
Black Cat no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 04:23 PM   #688
isaidso
the new republic
 
isaidso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The United Provinces of America
Posts: 29,756
Likes (Received): 10983

Good to hear. Would you say Mirabel was a major reason that passenger volumes are starting from such a low base? There seems to be a lot of growth since international and domestic flights were consolidated at Dorval. If Mirabel was the primary problem, hopefully we'll see Montreal numbers similar to that of Boston and Melbourne in the not too distant future.
isaidso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2007, 03:54 AM   #689
Black Cat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,774
Likes (Received): 815

Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
Good to hear. Would you say Mirabel was a major reason that passenger volumes are starting from such a low base? There seems to be a lot of growth since international and domestic flights were consolidated at Dorval. If Mirabel was the primary problem, hopefully we'll see Montreal numbers similar to that of Boston and Melbourne in the not too distant future.
When intercontinental and continental/domestic flights were located at separate airports, this effectively meant Montreal was handicapping itself. Consolidating all flights in one location made huge sense.

Many felt that Dorval should have closed, and Mirabel should have been kept open. However, despite the physical size of Mirabel, and the fact that it had a much bigger potential capacity, Dorval actually had more investment in it from the airline industry, and it is more than sufficient in size for considerably more traffic, I'm sure this is why Dorval was maintained - otherwise the federal government would have had to compensate the airlines to relocate their facilities to Mirabel. Also, if Dorval had closed, the whole West Island economy would have suffered very badly. (Note: the decision to merge the two airports only happened when BA and KLM threatened to pull out of Montreal altogether due to its very low air traffic demand in the mid 90s, and fast action was taken to prevent this.)

Now that Dorval is the Montreal hub airport, passenger numbers have improved significantly and should continue to do so. Whether it ever reaches Boston's or Melbourne's figures is impossible to say at this time, but I imagine the gap would close somewhat.
Black Cat no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2007, 02:18 PM   #690
isaidso
the new republic
 
isaidso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The United Provinces of America
Posts: 29,756
Likes (Received): 10983

Agree with all of that. It's quite a shock to think that BA and KLM would contemplate pulling out of Montreal.

Summer Olympic host, largest city in Canada till 1980, home of Bombardier and a massive aerospace industry, home of Air Canada, HQ for the International Air Transport Association, HQ for the United Nation's International Civil Aviation Organization.

These don't result in creating a good environment for airlines, but there aren't too many cities out there as geared to aviation as Montreal is. It must have been quite a shock to Montrealers to realize how bad things had become regarding air travel from their city.
isaidso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2007, 07:48 PM   #691
Canadian74
Registered User
 
Canadian74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 533
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
Good to hear. Would you say Mirabel was a major reason that passenger volumes are starting from such a low base? There seems to be a lot of growth since international and domestic flights were consolidated at Dorval. If Mirabel was the primary problem, hopefully we'll see Montreal numbers similar to that of Boston and Melbourne in the not too distant future.
Don't expect YUL pax numbers to be similar to MEL. But I think, YUL should atleast get to the 15-million mark by 2011.
Canadian74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2007, 05:43 PM   #692
isaidso
the new republic
 
isaidso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The United Provinces of America
Posts: 29,756
Likes (Received): 10983

Yep, at the very least, it will take 2 decades for YUL pax numbers to catch up to Melbourne.
isaidso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 01:21 AM   #693
ACT7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,402
Likes (Received): 77

It wasn't just Mirabel in and of itself that hurt Montreal but the entire political situation in Quebec seriously damaged future air traffic growth in Montreal. Mirabel was designed for 60 million passengers, 6 runways and all sorts of "spin-off" development. It never handled any more than 3 million (comparable to Winnipeg), never built 6 runways and never built the train service to the city that it had set out to do. What's really sad is if you look at the airlines that used to service Montreal. It really was the major hub of Canada and was positioned to be a major North American hub. Sure, the numbers have picked up significantly at Dorval over the years, but I think in order to reach YYZ, BOS or MEL status, there would have to be a fairly catastrophic event at those hubs to deter airlines from flying there. It also assumes that while YUL grows, YYZ, BOS and MEL stagnate...not likely. Sorry YUL, ain't gonna happen.
ACT7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 02:15 AM   #694
Filip
Torontonian 4ever
 
Filip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,891
Likes (Received): 435

Didn't the feds artificially make carriers serve Montreal? I know when many of those legislations were dropped many just packed up and flew to Toronto instead. It wasn't a secret that Toronto was the more enticing destination for foreign carriers - it's just the Quebec-loving federal goverment that always makes it more difficult for Pearson to reach its full potential.
Filip no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 04:26 AM   #695
Canadian74
Registered User
 
Canadian74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 533
Likes (Received): 1

Yeah, I think the Canadian government forced all European airlines to make Montreal their only Canadian destination.
Canadian74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 05:50 AM   #696
The Cebuano Exultor
Seeking Affiliation
 
The Cebuano Exultor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Metro Cebu
Posts: 1,211
Likes (Received): 21

@ [anyone]

So what are the city/metro rankings? Which cities/metros have the busiest air traffic?
__________________
Density of the City

Last edited by The Cebuano Exultor; November 13th, 2007 at 11:14 AM.
The Cebuano Exultor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 10:31 AM   #697
GregPz
Explore
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Durban
Posts: 2,742
Likes (Received): 249

Here's the metro rankings for 2006. All airports serving a city combined.

1 London 137.2 million
2 New York 104.3
3 Tokyo 97.1
4 Chicago 95.1
5 Los Angeles 86.2
6 Atlanta 84.9
7 Paris 84.3
8 Dallas 67.0
9 Washington/Baltimore 62.5
10 San Francisco 58.7
11 Frankfurt 56.5
12 Miami/Ft Lauderdale 53.8
13 Houston 51.1
14 Beijing 48.5
15 Denver 47.3
16 Las Vegas 46.6
17 Shanghai 46.1
18 Amsterdam 46.1
19 Madrid 45.5
20 Hong Kong 44.0
21 Bangkok 42.8
22 Seoul 42.1
23 Phoenix 41.4
24 Milan 36.7
25 Detroit 36.4
26 Minneapolis/St Paul 35.6
27 Sao Paulo 35.1
28 Singapore 35.0
29 Rome 35.0
30 Orlando 34.8
31 Osaka 33.6
32 Moscow 33.3
33 Philadelphia 31.8
34 Jakarta 31.1
35 Toronto 31.0
__________________
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.
GregPz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 11:09 AM   #698
The Cebuano Exultor
Seeking Affiliation
 
The Cebuano Exultor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Metro Cebu
Posts: 1,211
Likes (Received): 21

@ GregPz

What'd be Dubai's ranking in that list?
__________________
Density of the City
The Cebuano Exultor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 11:10 AM   #699
Skyprince
Asian boi
 
Skyprince's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Kuala Lumpur
Posts: 7,941

Hmm... Dubai is around 27 million in 2006... It might be included on 150 top list.
Skyprince no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2007, 11:13 AM   #700
The Cebuano Exultor
Seeking Affiliation
 
The Cebuano Exultor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Metro Cebu
Posts: 1,211
Likes (Received): 21

@ GregPz

What is it with London being far and above any other metro in the world in terms of air passenger traffic? Heck, even New York and Tokyo are left in the dust! London doesn't even have a descent-looking airport except perhaps Stansted.
__________________
Density of the City
The Cebuano Exultor no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
airports, aviation, europe, statistics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium