Cork Transport

@Pug wrote:

departing flights delayed this morning as baggage belts broke down but teething problems to be expected I suppose. Ryanair throwing shapes at taking the old terminal.

I wonder if those poor passengers got to use the airbridge this morning…. it was raining. Ryanair has been on about that for over a year now. They want to take control of the old terminal and operate it as a Ryanair only terminal, with charters using it at summer peak periods. I think it would be a great move if they did take it over, but I’d hope that it wouldn’t be at the expense of other airlines using Cork. Variety is good. I’d hate to see a monopoly at Cork. We had enough of that with Aer Lingus in the eighties.

@THE_Chris wrote:

But the flyover is a big, big help. Will be interesting though to see how quickly the tunnel snarls up once the schools go back.

😡 That tunnel is turning out to be one big Irish JOKE, mainland Europe is littered with tunnels and most Countries would use a guillotine on whoever is responsible for closing one on such a regular basis.
What is the problem with the tunnel?
Has the guarantee run out or are Walls still responsible for defects?
Will this “maintenance schedule” become more regular with age?
Will the taxpayer have to foot the repair bill if, (when) defects are found outside the warranty period?
Does anyone care; after all public money is there to be wasted!! 😉

@THE_Chris wrote:

Its the manhole covers. They keep breaking and the concrete around them needs replacing every few months.

Believe it or not, Im not joking about this.

😡
Thanks The_Chris, I was wondering what the problem was this time.
This sounds like the same problem that closed the tunnel within 2 months of it opening in 1999. I remember inshore fishermen at the time (before the tunnel was built) saying this would happen as the tunnel would be built in tidal waters, they were dismissed as fools by the engineers involved in the project.:o

A demand from Cork City Councillors for an update on the condition of the Jack Lynch tunnel dated 9th Feb.2004, Motion 10.9 brought the following response from city management;
“The condition of the Jack Lynch tunnel is excellent. There is no structural damage to the tunnel.
The tunnel is closed for 2 nights every three months for regular maintenance. The last closure was 8th – 9th January 2004. Apart from routine maintenance closures, there are no plans to close the Jack Lynch tunnel”

Who is telling porkies???:p

correct me if i am wrong , but i think the plan is to turn the old terminal into office and sundry.

I would guess they will keep the two open side by side , for some time in order to tease out the enevitable problems with the new building.

@a boyle wrote:

correct me if i am wrong , but i think the plan is to turn the old terminal into office and sundry.

I would guess they will keep the two open side by side , for some time in order to tease out the enevitable problems with the new building.

Indeed, that is the current plan. Although the part of the old terminal that handled inbound baggage may be knocked to allow one of the stands to accommodate wider aircraft.

I think I’ve posted this before, but for anyone who didn’t see it…

When the new terminal was built, they avoided having to do a full environmental impact assessment because the old one was closing. If the old one were to reopen, it would be required. That would delay any plan to reopen the old one although not necessarily scupper it.

I still maintain that Ryanair don’t run terminals and won’t take the terminal over. If it did reopen, it would be marketed as a Low Cost terminal for all LoCos operating into Cork.

I don’t think it’s a priority for Cork Airport anyway. The new terminal will suffice for a number of years and the planned extension to that one is more likely. I’d put future expansion of passenger capacity quite a long way down the list of needed enchancements after

• More stands for aircraft (Critical and it’s irrelevant to talk about expansion of passenger facilities until it’s done)
• Moving the cargo facilities from their current location
• Building a parallel taxiway (Without it, the airport can handle around 16 flights/8 turnarounds per hour (assuming a mix of inbound and outbound) only. This is already being pushed on summer weekends.
• A lengthened runway (Some destinations – Cyprus – already require aircraft to stop if the winds are blowing the wrong direction. Longer flights – Egypt – are planned and East Coast of the US is likely. Contrary to popular belief, the terrain will easily accommodate a 300m extension)

Prectically, the third and fourth on the list should be done at the same time.

@mickeydocs wrote:

It would be great to see Ryanair use it as a low cost hub. Would such a strategy be unique or does anyone know of an airport operating such a policy?

I know of nowhere where a Low Cost airline operates a terminal. However, there are some airport (e.g. Marseilles, Geneva) where the airport operator maintains a separate terminal for Low Cost operators.

@X Boil wrote:

Jungle, are you sure about this? Most people (popular belief!) seem to think there are major issues with this. Similar problems for upgrading the ILS to CAT-III?

X B

CAT III is a problem. The terrain falls away very quickly after the end of the runway and it would be very expensive to install it.

A short runway extension (up to 300m) isn’t an issue. This would be enough to make aircraft other than the 757 viable for transatlantic flights. Anything much more than 300m and you would run into problems, but unless very long flights or very big aircraft are being targetted, that’s not likely to be required.

The big issue with a runway extension would be how to keep the runway operational (especially to CAT II level, which is definitely needed in Cork) while it was being constructed.

That said, all these comments are made with respect to terrain. There would be land ownership issues assoicated with a runway extension and at least one house would require a CPO.

@Thomond Park wrote:

In fairness one house is not a huge price to pay once it is nothing special in architectural terms ans would be a lot less intrusive than some of the Dublin and Stansted extensions and proposed extensions.

Depending on the length of the extension, it could be as many as 7 or 8. There would also be another few houses that may become practically uninhabitable as the aircraft would be much lower overhead. It’s not massive money or inconvenience though.

If the airport management had any sense, they’d be purchasing these houses every time one of them came on the market anyway. They are going to need to acquire them at some point.

Its a pity they’re taking down those old buildings. Sure, they are ugly as they are, but the designs on them would have been quite nice if restored.

Any pics of the new place, or are we just gonna get another generic mostly-glass-front-Clarion-style hotel?

@Micko wrote:

Could someone settle this arguement.

I make off that years ago, maybe 40 years ago, to travel from Cork to Midleton you would first have to go into Glanmire, over the hump back bridge beside the AIB and up the back of the Water Resevoir and end up at thee back of the present IBIS hotel.

It was only years later that a bridge was built at the glanmire roundabout which allowed you to get to where the IBIS hotel is today.

😀 As I remember the route from Cork to Midleton; McCurtin St. pass Kent Station, pass the Silversprings Hotel (now Moran’s) to the Elm Tree pub, skew bridge, past Youghal Carpets factory….next stop Moby Dicks in Youghal (hic) circa 1971-2