New Dublin airport control tower by STW
- This topic has 60 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 17 years ago by
.
- Posts
Planning has already gone in.
Would be the tallest building in Ireland!
I’m not sure the building needs to be that tall, at least from the point of view of its technical requirements.
With modern radar and tracking systems an ATC tower does not require a view beyond the airfield itself, all it needs is a view over the airfield to monitor the movement of aircraft whilst they are on the ground. I’m not sure one needs to be standing 85 metres above Dublin airport to see its entire expanse.
Also the design is quite bland and altogether uninspiring.
Surely if their intention is to enter into the “Phallic Face-Off” competition for the tallest building in Ireland they could come up with something a little more, perky?
Thanks for that jdivision.
Upon reading that report I had a look at the site location map, which also shows the location of the proposed new runway.
If you look at this map the argument for the height of the tower to accommodate the new runway doesn’t seem to hold true.
The new runway runs parallel to the current one, and the new control tower is pretty much smack in the middle of the two.
If the current control tower is sufficient for the current runway, then surely it would also be able to handle another runway, equidistant to the current one, on its opposite side?I want to be convinced that there’s a need for the height of this tower, I really do, because we’ll all have to be looking at it, no matter where in Dublin (or surrounding counties) we are, for a very long time!
Am I wrong in thinking the new runway will be significantly longer to cater for the new Airbus? That might make a difference. In any event, the runway has been shelved for the time being:
http://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2009/mar/15/daa-shelves-350m-dublin-airport-plans/
That could also be a reason.
They’re all valid reasons for building a new control tower, no doubt about that.
I just wonder if the height is necessary.
My instinct is that it is not. The technical side of my brain (limited as it is) is also supporting that instinct.It could just be that when the DAA meet up with other airport authorities around the globe they want to be able to compare rods and not come up short.
Just a theory.@jdivision wrote:
Am I wrong in thinking the new runway will be significantly longer to cater for the new Airbus? That might make a difference. In any event, the runway has been shelved for the time being:
http://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2009/mar/15/daa-shelves-350m-dublin-airport-plans/
Are you refering to the Airbus A380? I doubt it will ever serve Dublin, way too big. The new runway is being built mainly to coincide with traffic increases (ie the current one will eventually reach operational capacity) but the current decline in traffic has led to the new runway being postponed until 2014.
Also, the current runway is too short for practical use by some modern long range aircraft, specifically the Boeing 777 and Airbus A340, hence the longer length will help attract long haul airlines from Asia is they ever want to serve Dublin. Also, Aer Lingus has the new Airbus A350 on order and this will probably require a longer runway if they are to use it on routes to Asia.
@archipig wrote:
Are you refering to the Airbus A380? I doubt it will ever serve Dublin, way too big. The new runway is being built mainly to coincide with traffic increases (ie the current one will eventually reach operational capacity) but the current decline in traffic has led to the new runway being postponed until 2014.
Also, the current runway is too short for practical use by some modern long range aircraft, specifically the Boeing 777 and Airbus A340, hence the longer length will help attract long haul airlines from Asia is they ever want to serve Dublin. Also, Aer Lingus has the new Airbus A350 on order and this will probably require a longer runway if they are to use it on routes to Asia.
Spot on. From memory Dublin runway is only about 2700m, whereas, the B777 needs approx 3100-3600 for takeoff at the weights required for long range routes. Likewise the a340 requires above 3000m. These are the 2 aircraft that most long haul carriers use noadays, certainly all of the Chinese/Japanese/Korean airlines that we would like to tempt here. The problem is not so much carrying passengers but lifting all the cargo (air mail etc) which is what actually makes alot of these routes possible. For example Aer Lingus were mulling Cape Town as a destination, which was within range of their a330 200, however the short runway at dublin merant they couldn’t take off at max weight rendering the route impossible…………of course there are still people of influence in Ireland who won’t let Dublin have a longer runway then Shannon!
As for concerns about the control tower, it does need the height to see the second runway as there may be new airport buildings obscuring part of the runway in years to come. Only in Ireland would people which about a control tower being too tall!
I note that STW have got another contract……if they are nothing else (and they aren’t) if not well connected…….
@thebig C wrote:
Spot on. From memory Dublin runway is only about 2700m, whereas, the B777 needs approx 3100-3600 for takeoff at the weights required for long range routes. Likewise the a340 requires above 3000m. These are the 2 aircraft that most long haul carriers use noadays, certainly all of the Chinese/Japanese/Korean airlines that we would like to tempt here. The problem is not so much carrying passengers but lifting all the cargo (air mail etc) which is what actually makes alot of these routes possible. For example Aer Lingus were mulling Cape Town as a destination, which was within range of their a330 200, however the short runway at dublin merant they couldn’t take off at max weight rendering the route impossible…………of course there are still people of influence in Ireland who won’t let Dublin have a longer runway then Shannon!
As for concerns about the control tower, it does need the height to see the second runway as there may be new airport buildings obscuring part of the runway in years to come. Only in Ireland would people which about a control tower being too tall!
I note that STW have got another contract……if they are nothing else (and they aren’t) if not well connected…….
Dude, don’t fall back on that ridiculous ‘only in Ireland’ rubbish. The current control tower is visible from parts of Dublin city centre, and it’s less than a third of the height of the proposed new tower. Alot of money has been spent recently demolishing another bunch of towers quite near the airport because, along with many many other things, they were an eyesore.
As for the Shannon vs. Dublin debate that you’ve brought up, perhaps there are people that would not like to see Dublin have as long a runway as Shannon, but there also seem to be people fundamentally opposed to giving Shannon the connectivity that it requires to be viable. Also, it doesn’t help that every half-town in the country feels that it has a fundamental right to an airport with connections to London and beyond. This country should only have three international airports. Everything else is a drain on resources.
@thebig C wrote:
As for concerns about the control tower, it does need the height to see the second runway as there may be new airport buildings obscuring part of the runway in years to come. Only in Ireland would people which about a control tower being too tall!
…
That makes sense. T3 whenever its built will obviously be immediatly west of the control tower.
@foremanjoe wrote:
I’m not sure the building needs to be that tall, at least from the point of view of its technical requirements.
With modern radar and tracking systems an ATC tower does not require a view beyond the airfield itself, all it needs is a view over the airfield to monitor the movement of aircraft whilst they are on the ground. I’m not sure one needs to be standing 85 metres above Dublin airport to see its entire expanse.
Also the design is quite bland and altogether uninspiring.
Surely if their intention is to enter into the “Phallic Face-Off” competition for the tallest building in Ireland they could come up with something a little more, perky?
I kind of like the design. It’s kind of minimalist and a little bit sci-fi. Anyway it’s just a functionalist object which nobody will pay attention to.
@rumpelstiltskin wrote:
I kind of like the design. It’s kind of minimalist and a little bit sci-fi. Anyway it’s just a functionalist object which nobody will pay attention to.
Ah come on rumpelstiltskin, wake up! 😀
The point I’ve been banging on about is that the tower is so tall that’ll it’ll be visible from all over Dublin and beyond, meaning that many people will have no other option than to pay attention to it.
As for the design debate, I thinks it’s a bit paradoxical to create a tower that is this tall and will stand out so much, and then make it minimalist?
Is it too much to ask for something a little more daring?
It’s going to be so hard to nickname this tower otherwise…
“the tower is so tall that’ll it’ll be visible from all over Dublin and beyond”
“The current control tower is visible from parts of Dublin city”Ah come on now yourself… 86.9m is not that tall. The poolbeg chimneys are over 200m
And no, it is not at all “paradoxical” to make a tall object minimalist.
And from where exactly in the city is the current tower visible?Though I agree the design is less than inspiring… on second look, its pretty hideous.
Ok I’m pushing it a bit with the visible from the city argument.
It can’t really be seen from street level in the inner city but it can be seen from some north facing upper floor windows. And it can be seen from the south of the city as the ground level rises.
I think it’s altogether possible that the new tower will be visible from street level in some spots.Also, the airport really isn’t far from the city centre at all, and there is a considerable rise from the liffey to the airport, not enough to bring it close to the Poolbeg towers, but enough to make it a significant statement on the horizon.
True, the airport is not that far, but Ballymun, where there were 7x 42m towers of considerable bulk and still is a 60m chimney stack, is closer.
Sure, maybe from the gravity bar, or whatever it is called at Guinness, it may be visible, but I would never consider it a “significant statement”. There may be plenty of arguments against it, but visual impact on the city is not one of them.“the tower is so tall that’ll it’ll be visible from all over Dublin and beyond”
“The current control tower is visible from parts of Dublin city”Come off it!! For a number of years I lived within a few Km of Heathrow (control tower height 86.7M), and there is no hint of that on the skyline until you are on the approach roads to the airport, in a field beside the airport, or up a tall building on the outer West suburbs of Lon.
I really don’t understand this type of small minded thinking. Do you really think the DAA would waste that amount of money on a new control tower just for showmanship……:mad:
@foremanjoe wrote:
Dthere also seem to be people fundamentally opposed to giving Shannon the connectivity that it requires to be viable.
I dont really understand this argument. The ‘connections that it requires’? Shannon is not subsidized anymore, its been thrown into the real world. Connections that it ‘requires’ are decided by the markets now instead of politics. And if a market exists for a particular connection, airlines will be happy to serve it.
@Dec56 wrote:
Do you really think the DAA would waste that amount of money on a new control tower just for showmanship……:mad:
I do.
@foremanjoe wrote:
I’m not sure the building needs to be that tall, at least from the point of view of its technical requirements.
With modern radar and tracking systems an ATC tower does not require a view beyond the airfield itself, all it needs is a view over the airfield to monitor the movement of aircraft whilst they are on the ground. I’m not sure one needs to be standing 85 metres above Dublin airport to see its entire expanse.
Also the design is quite bland and altogether uninspiring.
Surely if their intention is to enter into the “Phallic Face-Off” competition for the tallest building in Ireland they could come up with something a little more, perky?
You have to marvel at the brilliance of your bog standard message board poster.
All he needs to do is have a quick think and the answer to everything is at his fingertips.How could the IAA be so thick?
Using what I guess is the biggest number they know to specify the height of the control tower.
Yes,it is their job to study the issue but they can’t be bothered with all that fussing. A big number should do lads.Clearly it’s just luck that the height designed by pure accident means they will see future lengthened runways over various buildings.
The same wally will be complaining that the DAA/IAA fail to think ahead.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
